alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Catherine G. Manning","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/cgmannin\/","title":"Spectrum Points of Contact","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"CePLu78IsF\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/somd\/space-communications-navigation-program\/spectrum-points-of-contact\/\">Spectrum Points of Contact<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/somd\/space-communications-navigation-program\/spectrum-points-of-contact\/embed\/#?secret=CePLu78IsF\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Spectrum Points of Contact” — NASA\" data-secret=\"CePLu78IsF\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/03\/spectrum-contact-us-0.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
#### O’Brien and Others, Executors, *v.*Daniel and Others.

An affidavit in attachment cannot be objected to for not describing the nature of the debt, if the same be described in a declaration filed in the cause.

The affidavit, in the case of a domestic attachment, must state the county in which the debtor had recently resided*

*291ERROR to the *Posey*Circuit Court.

*Ilovik,*for the plaintiffs.

*Hall,*for the defendants.

*Thursday, November*12.

Holman, J.

Domestic attachment on the following affidavit:—“State of *Indiana, Posey*county, ss. I, *Richard*Daniel, of the county aforesaid, do solemnly swear that *John J. O'Brien, James J. O'Brien,*and *Michael O'Byrns,*executors of the last will and testament of *Thomas Jones,*deceased, are justly indebted to me, the said *Richard Daniel,*in the sum of 150 dollars; and that the said *John J. O'Brien, James J. O'Brien,*and *Michael O'Byrns,*so conceal themselves that the ordinary process of law cannot be served upon *them.—R. Daniel."*Endorsed, sworn to, &c. A number of creditors filed their claims under this attachment, and proceedings were had to final judgment. Among a variety of errors assigned for reversing these proceedings, two exceptions are taken to the affidavit. One is, that the affidavit does 'specify the nature of the debt on which the attachment is founded: but as a declaration was afterwards filed by *Daniel,*specifying the nature, &c. of his debt, this defect is removed. The other is, that the affidavit does not state that the debtors were late of the said county, as required by the act of assembly, or of any other county in this state. This exception is well taken. The act of assembly requires the affidavit to state the late residence of the debtors. R. C. 1824, p. 61 (1). From any thing in this affidavit, the debtors may have been non-residents, and not subject to a domestic attachment. The *ex parte*nature of these proceedings requires a strict compliance with every statutory requisition.

*Per*Curiam.

The judgment is reversed with costs. To be certified, &c.

(1)

 Accord. R. C. 1831, p. 75.
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE AWARD OF HIGHWAY LIGHTING CONTRACT NO. 6, ROUTE 1-280.

May 22, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
Call Option Agreement between
                        Ladsleigh Investments Limited and
                             eFunds Global.Com, Inc.

March 2, 2000

Ladsleigh  Investments Limited (Ladsleigh) hereby sells eFunds Global.Com,  Inc.
(eFunds) a Call Option,  in exchange for all accrued and future  interest on the
$2,850,000 Promissory Note between eVision USA.Com, Inc. (eVision) and Ladsleigh
dated July 30, 1999 (Note) being forgiven and $250,000,  with terms as described
below:

Exercise Price      The total exercise price of the Call Option is $2,850,000.

Underlying          The Call Option's  underlying  securities are 100,000 shares
Securities          of Lil  Capital,  Inc.  (Lil) which  represents  one hundred
                    percent (100%) of the issued and outstanding stock of Lil.

Anti-Dilutive       Ladsleigh  hereby agrees to not issue  additional  shares in
Provision           Lil and that  the  Underlying  Securities  will  remain  one
                    hundred percent (100%) of the issued and  outstanding  stock
                    of Lil.

Expiration          This Call  Option  expires in 10 years from the date of this
                    agreement.

Loan Offset         Ladsleigh hereby agrees to offset the proceeds received from
                    the exercise of this Call Option against the Note.

                    eFunds will retain all  proceeds  from the  exercise of this
                    Call Option until the Note has been fully repaid.

Escrow and          All  Underlying  Securities  will be held by and  pledged to
Pledge              eFunds tosecure the exercise of this Call Option.

Partial Exercise    eFunds has the right to partially  exercise the Call Option.
                    Ownership of the prevailing  Underlying  Securities  will be
                    transferred  pro-rata to eFunds upon partial exercise.  When
                    required, quantities will be rounded up to the next smallest
                    unit size.

                    If  eFunds'  exercising  results  in the Call  Option  being
                    completely exercised, the remaining untransferred Underlying
                    Securities will be transferred to eFunds.




<PAGE>



Further             Ladsleigh  hereby agrees that it will not cause Lil to enter
Commitments         into any further  commitments or  transactions;  or transfer
                    any assets in or out of Lil,  without the prior  approval of
                    eFunds.


For and on behalf of:



/s/ Robert A. Shandler
----------------------------------------
Ladsleigh Investments Limited

Agreed and accepted by:


/s/ Tony Chan
----------------------------------------
eFunds Global.Com, Inc.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lillian Gipson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lillian-gipson-1nasa-gov\/","title":"New Flight Data Portal Ready to Support Quesst Mission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"gnisIawWGa\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/integrated-aviation-systems-program\/armd-iasp-fdc\/new-flight-data-portal-ready-to-support-quesst-mission\/\">New Flight Data Portal Ready to Support Quesst Mission<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/integrated-aviation-systems-program\/armd-iasp-fdc\/new-flight-data-portal-ready-to-support-quesst-mission\/embed\/#?secret=gnisIawWGa\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“New Flight Data Portal Ready to Support Quesst Mission” — NASA\" data-secret=\"gnisIawWGa\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/landing_001_photo_credit_lockheed_martin_1.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":320}
#### William Lackey et al *v.*H. F. Blandy.

Demurrer — Pleadings—Allegations in Answer Taken as True.

A demurrer to an answer to a petition that alleges the acceptance by plaintiff of new notes with security, in settlement of those sued on, and which were secured by a mortgage, should be over-ruled as it is an admission of the facts as alleged in the answer.

Bills and Notes — Contract for Payment in Lumber.

A contract for delivery at a given point, of personal property, in settlement of notes, though the property be not accepted, the debtor is entitled to recover against the creditor the value of such of the property as was lost by reason of the creditors negligence.

APPEAL EROM MARSHALL CIRCUIT COURT.

October 20, 1868.

This was a suit to enforce payment of the balance of the purchase price of a sawmill outfit. The petition avers the execution and delivery to plaintiffs of two notes of $500 each, due four and eight months, and a mortgage upon the outfit to secure same; that afterwards, Thomas S. Lackey and William Lackey, appellant, executed two notes for $539 each in two and four months, as additional security for the two notes first given. Defendants answering, denied that the mortgage was given at the time of the execution of the notes, but at plaintiff’s urgent, request, was executed some two months afterwards; that the last two named notes were given, with Thomas S. Lackey as security, in full satisfaction of the notes of $500 each and the mortgage, and that it was afterwards contracted and agreed that defendants could deliver for plaintiffs on the Ohio river at Hamletsburg, Ohio, 100,000 feet of lumber at $12.50 per thousand, to be in full satisfaction of the said last two notes. That pursuant to said agreement, they delivered the lumber at the place designated, and that by reason of the failure of plaintiffs to give them the benefit of the value of said lumber, they claim damages in the sum of $1,500. A demurrer was filed to the answer, and sustained. An amended answer was filed, alleging payment in full of the notes.

The evidence showed that a contract was made with the agent of plaintiffs for the lumber as alleged in defendants answer, and *477that about 100,000 feet was placed on the bant of the Ohio river, in easy access for shipment, within the agreed time, and that afterwards, during high water, part of it was washed away.

Dabney, *for appellant.*

*Palmer, for appellee.*

From a verdict and judgment for plaintiffs, defendants prosecute this appeal.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Bobertson :

The allegations in the answer, that the new notes with surety were accepted as satisfaction of the debt previously secured by mortgage, were admitted by the demurrer. And these allegations are, as thus admitted, sufficient for waiving the mortgage. The demurrer ought therefore to have been overruled.

It seems to us also that the allegations and proof as to the contract for lumber, and the delivery of it on the bank of the Ohio, prima facie entitle Lackey to at least the value of so much as was lost to him.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         101,994
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  486,656
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    498,554
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,253,244
<PP&E>                                       1,029,360
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,019
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,943,720
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,317,605
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,251
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,171,896
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               381,472
<CGS>                                          229,589
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  229,589
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               247,849
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             245,246
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (341,212)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (341,212)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (341,212)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.06)



</TABLE>
#### L. McQuarry *v.*John W. Rochester et al.

Attachment — Necessary Affidavit.

It is error to sustain an attachment levied on a non-resident’s real estate in the absence of an affidavit to the effect that the defendant has no personal property in this State or not enough thereof to satisfy plaintiffs’ claim.

Land Susceptible of Division. ■

It is error to adjudge that an entire tract of land be soffi to satisfy a judgment when it is not made to appear that it was not reasonably susceptible of division.

APPEAL EROM GARRARD CIRCUIT COURT.

November 23, 1867.

Opinion ok the Court by

Judge Hardin:

This appeal brings up for revision a judgment of the Garrard circuit court in several consolidated suits against Mrs. L. McQuarry and others, directing a sale of a house and lot in the town *113of Lancaster, levied on under attachments against Mrs. McQuarry, and a subsequent judgment confirming a commissioner’s report of the sale.

The action of the court is complained of on various grounds, of which it is only necessary to refer to such as must control our decision. 1. In all the cases except that of L. Lusk the plaintiff failed to file an affidavit as required by section 251 of the Civil Code, to the effect that Mrs. McQuarry, who had not appeared or been actually summoned, had no personal property or not enough to satisfy the plaintiff’s claims in this State known to them or the party making the affidavit. 2. As the price for which the property was sold exceeded the amount of the debts and costs, it was not necessary to adjudge the sale of the entire property unless it was made to appear that it was not reasonably susceptible of such a division as to admit of a sale of so much only as was necessary to pay the debts and costs, and as this fact was not made to appear, the judgment was on this ground erroneous. 3. In the cases of Rochester & McNeil, M. T. Evans, Yantis & Sweeney and Sutfield & Smith, the attorney, M. L. Rice, appointed to defend the action for the absent defendant, does not seem to have filed a written statement signed by him, of what he had done as required by section 441 of the Code before any order for his compensation should have been made; the orders allowing said Rice compensation in these cases was therefore erroneous.

Other irregularities appear in the record, but as the judgments must be reversed for the errors already indicated, it is unnecessary to consider them.

We express no opinion as to the validity of the sale. On the return of the cause, that matter may be litigated by proper proceedings, and the defendants will be permitted to defend the actions.

Wherefore, the judgments are reversed, and the causes remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENTto theAMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATIONofTRICO MARINE SERVICES, INC.

    Trico Marine Services, Inc., a corporation organized andexisting under laws of the State of Delaware (the "Corporation"),

    DOES HEREBY CERTIFY THAT:

    FIRST: On April 11, 2000, the Board ofDirectors of the Corporation did duly adopt resolutions setting forth a proposedamendment to the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of theCorporation (the "Certificate of Incorporation"), declaring saidamendment to be advisable and directing that the proposed amendment be submittedto a vote of the holders of the Corporation's common stock.

    SECOND: On June 7, 2000, holders of morethan a majority of the Corporation's common stock voted for a proposal amendingthe first paragraph of Article IV of the Certificate of Incorporation so that,as amended, the first paragraph of Article IV shall read as follows:

> 
"1. *Authorized Stock*. The				Corporation shall be authorized to issue an aggregate of				60,000,000 shares of capital stock, of which 55,000,000 shall be				common stock, $0.01 par value per share (the "Common				Stock"), and 5,000,000 shall be Preferred Stock, $0.01 par				value per share (the "Preferred Stock")."

    THIRD: Said amendment was duly adopted inaccordance with the provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law ofthe State of Delaware.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Trico Marine Services,Inc. has caused this Certificate of Amendment to be executed in its corporatename by its Chairman of the Board and attested by its Secretary, both theretoduly authorized this 8th day of June, 2000.

|  | TRICO MARINE SERVICES, INC.
By:  /S/ RONALD O. PALMER       Ronald O. Palmer			       Chairman of the Board
Attest:

/S/ VICTOR M. PEREZVictor M. Perez			Secretary |
|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 21, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20482 Summary Calendar

IRA MALMED, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General of the United States Agency, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:03-CV-217

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
AFFIRMED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 47.6.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION II

In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of

JORDAN MATTHEW DOUGLAS,

Petitioner.

No. 56610-9-II

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

WORSWICK, J. — Jordan Matthew Douglas seeks relief from personal restraint imposed 

following his 2015 plea of guilty to unlawful possession of controlled substances under RCW 

69.50.4013(1). He argues that his conviction is void under State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170, 481 

P.3d 521 (2021). The State concedes that Douglas’s conviction is void. We accept the State’s 

concession, grant Douglas’s petition, and remand to the trial court to vacate his judgment and 

sentence. We deny his request for appointment of counsel for this petition.

A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the 

Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 

2.06.040, it is so ordered.

Worswick, J.

We concur:

Glasgow, A.C.J.

Veljacic, J.

Filed

Washington State

Court of Appeals

Division Two

March 22, 2022
HMN FINANCIAL, INC.
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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: March 4, 2011
    
    /s/ Bradley KrehbielBradley Krehbiel
 President HMN Financial, Inc.(Principal Executive Officer)/s/Jon EberleJon EberleSenior Vice President/Chief Financial Officerand Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Candice Chase Wilson,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03722-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: November 27, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8958 Filed 11/29/17 Page 1 of 1