alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Caesar L. Torres,

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-17-02711-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: October 26, 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 8419 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 1
#### Daniel Stagg *v.*Curators of Kentucky University.

Pleading — Petition Sufficient to Constitute Cause of Action — Stock Subscription to a University.

An action to cancel a subscription for stock in a university, to be sufficient, must show that his subscription contained an allegation that the university was to be located in a certain town, and that, the agent, who solicited subscriptions on such representations', was! authored to make them.

Same — Payment of Stock in Tuition.

On an allegation that upon the subscriptions in stock, he was entitled to tuition therefor, before an action will lie, it must be shown the university refused to permit him to send pupils thereto as prescribed in the certificate.

Colleges and Universities — Removal to Another County — Liability for Refund of Stock Subscriptions.

Where, by the act of the legislature, authorizing the removal of a university from one county to another, and requiring the refunding of stock subscriptions to original subscribers in the first county the university was located, “the amount of tuition unpaid to them,” as provided in their stock, where one of the subscribers had removed from the county before the passage of said act, he would not be entitled to the benefits thereof.

APPEAL FROM FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT.

January 11, 1870.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

Although appellant alleges in his petition that his said subscription was made and procured upon the faith and representation by the authorized agent to procure subscriptions for the permanent endowment of said institution, that it should be located in, or near Harrodsburg. He fails to allege that his subscription contained that condition, and also fails to allege that said agent, although authorized to procure subscriptions, was authorized to make the asserted representation.

Moreover, it appears from the certificate of stock filed by ap*452pellant as the foundation of his claim that in consideration of his subscription, and the payment of the amount thereof he was entitled to tuition in said University to the amount of said payment at the rate of $30 *per annum*for each pupil, etc. But he does not allege that appellees have failed or refused to permit him to send pupils to the Kentucky University on the terms prescribed in said certificate or that they have put it out of their power to pay him in tuition fees.

*Polk, for appellant.*

*Beck & Thornton, for appellees.*

There is nothing in the original charter prohibiting the removal of the University, or, subjecting it to the repayment of the .stock, to stockholders in case of removal; but by the Act of the legislature authorizing the removal of said University to Fayette county, it is bound to refund to the citizens of Mercer county the amount of tuition unpaid to them. But appellant had removed from the county of Mercer before the passage of said Act, as is alleged in his petition, and is not entitled to the benefit of that provision.

It seems that the petition failed to state facts to constitute a cause of action. Wherefore, the judgment is *affirmed.*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Mark A. Garcia","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/markagarcia\/","title":"Expedition 40","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"w4zxCgyXYT\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/expedition-40\/\">Expedition 40<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/expedition-40\/embed\/#?secret=w4zxCgyXYT\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Expedition 40” — NASA\" data-secret=\"w4zxCgyXYT\" 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\/2023\/03\/exp40-portrait.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":480}
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-41204

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE ARNALDO VERA-CHAVEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:08-CR-1046-ALL

Before KING, JOLLY, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Arnaldo VeraChavez (Vera) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Vera has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,

and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 15, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Philbrick H.H. Cook, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR-98-00869-PHX-GMS

ORDER OF DETENTION

Defendant appeared before this Court on a Petition for Revocation of Supervised

Release. The issue of detention was submitted to the Court. The Court considered the

Petition and file in determining whether defendant should be released on conditions set by

the Court.

The Court finds that defendant has failed to carry his burden of establishing that he

does not pose a serious flight risk or danger to any other person or to the community pursuant

to Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The Court concludes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant is a serious

flight risk and that there is no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably

assure his appearance at future proceedings.

The Court also concludes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant is a

danger and that there is no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure

the safety of the community.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant be detained pending further

proceedings.

DATED this 10th day of July, 2017
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
UNAUDITED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD ENDED  SEPTEMBER 30,
1999,  AND  IS  QUALIFIED  IN  ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO  SUCH  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             458
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     458
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          101,617
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            50
<OTHER-SE>                                   (101,209)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       458
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,463
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,437
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,900)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,900)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,900)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Marco Antonio Lopez-Urias, 

Defendant. 

NO. CR-15-01248-001-PHX-SMM 

ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING 

DISPOSITION (PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. § 3143) 

In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3143, a detention hearing was 

submitted on 8/6/2019. Defendant was present and was represented by counsel. The 

defendant has not rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee if 

released. 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

I find by a preponderance of the evidence that: 

☒ The defendant is not a citizen of the United States or lawfully admitted for 

permanent residence. 

☒ The defendant, at the time of the charged offense, was in the United States 

illegally. 

☒ The defendant has a prior criminal history. 

☒ The defendant has been ordered detained on the underlying 8 USC 1326(a)&(b)(1) 

charged in Case No: CR19-00902-PHX-SMM. 

The Court incorporates by reference the material findings of the Pretrial Services Agency 

which were reviewed by the Court at the time of the hearing in this matter, except as 

noted in the record. 
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

1. There is a serious risk that the defendant will flee. 

2. No condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance 

of the defendant as required. 

DIRECTIONS REGARDING DETENTION 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his/her designated 

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, 

from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The 

defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense 

counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to 

the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court 

proceeding. 

APPEALS AND THIRD PARTY RELEASE 

 IT IS ORDERED that should an appeal of this detention order be filed with the 

District Court, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a copy of the motion for 

review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing set before 

the District Court. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it 

is counsel's responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing 

before the District Court to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and 

investigate the potential third party custodian. 

DATE: 8/6/2019
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Emilio Jimenez-Perez, 

Defendant.

No. CR-15-01106-PHX-SPL

DETENTION ORDER 

 On June 30, 2017, Defendant appeared before this Court on a petition for 

revocation of supervised release. The issue of detention was submitted to the Court. The 

Court considered the petition and file in determining whether Defendant should be 

released on conditions set by the Court. 

 The Court finds that Defendant, having previously been convicted and placed on 

supervised release, and having appeared before the Court in connection with a petition to 

revoke his supervised release, has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence 

that he is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of the community if released 

pursuant to Rule 46(d), and Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and 18 

U.S.C. § 3143. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant be detained pending further 

proceedings. 

 Dated this 30th day of June, 2017. 

Honorable Eileen S. Willett

United States Magistrate Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Stephanie Anne Navas,

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-18-00009-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: January 5, 2018 /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 9606 Filed 01/11/18 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT







The Board of Directors
BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement on:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 FORM                    REGISTRATION STATEMENT NUMBERS
 ----                    ------------------------------
<S>         <C>
  S-3       333-72283; 333-38799; 333-24571; 333-23771; 333-05287;333-93139;

  S-8       333-73047; 333-68871; 333-58753; 333-57893; 333-56823; 333-08025;
            333-89378; 333-87315; 333-82489; 333-45680; 333-56798
</TABLE>

of BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated January 25, 2001 relating to
the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition of BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.
(and subsidiaries) as of December 31, 2000, and 1999, and the related
Consolidated Statements of Operations, Stockholders' Equity and Comprehensive
Income, and Cash Flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2000, which report appears in the December 31, 2000, annual report
on Form 10-K of BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.


                                                   /s/KPMG LLP


Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
March  27, 2001
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 63 Reported in House (RH)]






                                                   House Calendar No. 4
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 63

                           [Report No. 105-9]

To designate the reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the Central Valley 
               project, California, as ``Trinity Lake''.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 1997

  Mr. Herger introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

                             March 10, 1997

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
To designate the reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the Central Valley 
               project, California, as ``Trinity Lake''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF TRINITY LAKE.

    (a) Designation.--The reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the 
Central Valley project, California, and designated as ``Clair Engle 
Lake'' by Public Law 88-662 (78 Stat. 1093) is hereby redesignated as 
``Trinity Lake''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in any law, regulation, document, 
record, map, or other paper of the United States to the reservoir 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be considered to be a reference to 
``Trinity Lake''.
    (c) Repeal of Earlier Designation.--Public Law 88-662 (78 Stat. 
1093) is repealed.
                                     





                                                   House Calendar No. 4

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                H. R. 63

                           [Report No. 105-9]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To designate the reservoir created by Trinity Dam in the Central Valley 
               project, California, as ``Trinity Lake''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 10, 1997

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed`
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Justin Wright, Appellant

No. 06-15-00001-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 5th District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 13-F1055-005). Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Morriss, Justice Moseley and 

*Justice Carter participating. *Sitting by 

Assignment.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed 

for want of jurisdiction. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Justin Wright, has adequately indicated his inability to pay 

costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED MARCH 11, 2015

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
423 A.2d 1314

#### Commonwealth v. Staten, Appellant.

Submitted December 8, 1978.

E. Yvonne Grear, for appellant; Edward G. Rendell, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before VAN der VOORT, WIEAND and LIPEZ, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Alivia R. Carruth","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/arcarrut\/","title":"STS-51G","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"qVFbAlYc3D\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/sts-51g\/\">STS-51G<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/sts-51g\/embed\/#?secret=qVFbAlYc3D\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“STS-51G” — NASA\" data-secret=\"qVFbAlYc3D\" 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\/2023\/03\/word-image-1242.jpeg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":451}