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

Leo Leon Edwards,

Defendant.

No. CR-15-08241-01-PCT-JJT

ORDER

The Defendant appeared before this Court with counsel. The Defendant's 

Preliminary Revocation Hearing was waived and the Detention Hearing was submitted on 

the record. The Court finds probable cause to believe that the Defendant violated the terms 

of his supervised release as alleged in the petition. The Court further finds, pursuant to 

Rule 32.1(a)(6), that Defendant has failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that 

he is not a flight risk or a danger.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendant shall be bound over for further 

proceedings on the petition to revoke his supervised release.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant is detained as a flight risk and a 

danger, pending further revocation proceedings. 

Dated this 5th day of November, 2019.
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 11

                          FRANKLIN FINANCE CORPORATION
                   COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE

Net income for basic income per share is computed by subtracting from the
applicable income the dividend requirements on preferred stock to arrive at
income applicable to common stock and dividing this amount by the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      NINE MONTHS ENDED            THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         SEPTEMBER 30,                SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                      2001          2000           2001           2000
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                              <C>             <C>           <C>            <C>
INCOME
Net income                                                       $    2,282,195  $  2,099,341  $   842,135    $   701,210
Less: preferred stock dividend requirements                           1,350,675     1,350,675      450,225        450,225
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net income applicable to common stock                            $      931,520  $    748,666  $   391,910    $   250,985

SHARES
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding                     22,077        22,077       22,077         22,077

NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE                                      $        42.19  $      33.91  $     17.75    $     11.37
</TABLE>





                                       14
Exhibit 32.2

                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR
                       RULE 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C.  1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the  annual  report of Petrosearch Energy Corporation (the
"Company")  on  Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David  C.  Collins, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18  U.S.C. 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 the
Company.

Date: June 6, 2006                              By:  /s/ David J. Collins
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     David J. Collins
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
Case 2:15-mj-01950-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/24/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01950-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/24/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01950-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/24/15 Page 3 of 3
ILND 450 (Rev. 10/13) Judgment in a Civil Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

DANIEL CERVANTES, 

Plaintiff(s), 

 

v. 

BRIDGESTONE RETAIL OPERATIONS, 

LLC, et al.,, 

Defendant(s). 

Case No. 20-cv-02164 

Judge Andrea R. Wood 

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE 

Judgment is hereby entered (check appropriate box): 

 in favor of plaintiff(s) 

 and against defendant(s) 

 in the amount of $ , 

 

 which includes pre–judgment interest. 

 does not include pre–judgment interest. 

 Post-judgment interest accrues on that amount at the rate provided by law from the date of this judgment. 

 Plaintiff(s) shall recover costs from defendant(s). 

 in favor of defendant(s) 

 and against plaintiff(s) 

.

 Defendant(s) shall recover costs from plaintiff(s). 

 other: in favor of Defendants Bridgestone Retail Operations, LLC,Bridgestone Americas, Inc., 

and Bridgestone Corporation, and against Plaintiff Daniel Cervantes. 

This action was (check one): 

 tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict. 

 tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision was reached. 

 decided by Judge Andrea Wood on a motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to stay action and compel 

arbitration. 

Date: 12/18/2020 Thomas G. Bruton, Clerk of Court 

Case: 1:20-cv-02164 Document #: 32 Filed: 12/18/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:286
ILND 450 (Rev. 10/13) Judgment in a Civil Action

 David Lynn , Deputy Clerk 

Case: 1:20-cv-02164 Document #: 32 Filed: 12/18/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:287
9370.

#### Phillips & Son *et al. v.*Bagwell Motor Car Company.

Decided July 10, 1918.

Bloodwobth, J.

1. The ground of the motion for new trial alleging error “because the court erred in forcing defendant into trial without the witness I-Ioyt Bagwell” is without merit. It does not appear that the defendant made a motion for a continuance or postponement, or complied with the provisions of § 5715 of the Civil Code (1910).

2. The other questions raised by the motion for a new trial depend for decision upon a consideration óf a brief of- the evidence. While “the insertion of some questions and answers in a brief of evidence, where apparently necessary to present t\ie evidence with lucidity and precision, does not necessarily constitute a breach of the requirement that testimony be presented in narrative form,” a brief of evidence should not include objections to evidence, rulings of the court thereon, and colloquies between court and counsel; and where the purported brief is loaded with such unnecessary, irrelevant and superfluous matter, it will not be considered^ by this court, and no question depending on the evidence will be decided. A brief of evidence should “include, therein only material evidence.” Civil Code (1910), § 6093; *Bunn*v. *Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.,*18 *Ga. App.*66 (88 S. E. 798); Fulton *Lodge*v. *Roberson,*18 *Ga. App.*586 (89 S. E. 1088); *Whitaker*v. *State,*138 *Ga.*139*(4a),*145 (75 S. E. 254).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Harwell, J., concur.*

*489Mortgage foreclosure; from city court of Hall county—Judge Wheeler. October *22,*1917.

*O. N. Davie, K. D. Kenyon,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Sloan & Sloan,*contra.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Bill Keeter","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/wkeeter\/","title":"Charity Weeden","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"A1wF68eTGd\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/charity-weeden\/\">Charity Weeden<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/charity-weeden\/embed\/#?secret=A1wF68eTGd\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Charity Weeden” — NASA\" data-secret=\"A1wF68eTGd\" 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\/09\/nhq202311080004.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
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 U.S. Timberlands Klamath Falls, L.L.C.
  (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003,
  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
  Report), I, Thomas C. Ludlow, Chief Financial 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; and

2.
  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
  the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Thomas C. Ludlow 
  Thomas C. Ludlow
  Chief Financial Officer 
  August 13, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required
  by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating,
  acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement
  required by Section 906, has been provided to U.S. Timberlands Klamath Falls,
  L.L.C. and will be retained by U.S. Timberlands KlamathFalls,
  L.L.C. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
  upon request.
<PAGE>
                                                                  Exhibit. 10.21

                     HINES-SUMISEI NY CORE OFFICE TRUST II
                            ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT OF
                              DECLARATION OF TRUST

         HINES-SUMISEI N.Y. CORE OFFICE TRUST II, a Maryland real estate
investment trust (the "Trust"), hereby certifies to the State Department of
Assessments and Taxation of Maryland as follows:

         FIRST: The Trust desires to amend its Declaration of Trust as
currently in effect (the "Declaration of Trust").

         SECOND: The following is hereby inserted at the end of the first
sentence of Section 9.3 of the Declaration of Trust:

         "provided that the Trust shall not indemnify any Indemnified Person
that is an employee, officer or director of HILP or of an Affiliate of HILP
(other than an independent director of the general partner of the Non-Managing
General Partner of Holding Partnership (the term "Non-Managing General Partner"
being defined in the partnership agreement of Holding Partnership) for any act
or omission by such Indemnified Person which (A) following the admission of the
Non-Managing General Partner to the Holding Partnership, as long as the
Non-Managing Partner retains a partnership interest in the Holding Partnership,
as long as the Non-Managing Partner retains a partnership interest in the
Holding Partnership, constitutes misconduct or negligence, or (B) at any other
time; constitutes gross negligence, recklessness, willful misconduct, bad faith
or a knowing violation of law."

         THIRD: The amendment to the Declaration of Trust as hereinabove set
forth has been duly advised by the Board of Trustees and approved by the
shareholders of the Trust as required by law.

         FOURTH: The undersigned President acknowledges these Articles of
Amendment to be the act of the Trust and as to all matters or facts required to
be verified under oath, the undersigned President acknowledges that to the best
of his knowledge, information and belief, these matters and facts are true in
all material respects and that this statement is made under the penalties of
perjury.

                          [Signature page to follow.]

\
<PAGE>
         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Trust has caused these Articles of Amendment to be
signed in its name on its behalf by its President and attested to by its
Secretary this 4th day of May, 2004.

                                      HINES-SUMISEI NY CORE OFFICE TRUST II



                                      By: /s/ James A. Hime
                                         ----------------------------------
                                         James A. Hime
                                         President



ATTEST:


By: James W. Oyer
   --------------------------
   James W. Oyer
   Secretary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Loop Spine & Sports Center, Ltd.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−02358

Honorable John J. Tharp Jr.

OpenMed, Inc., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, December 21, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr:Upon receipt of the

plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) [30], this

matter is concluded. All future dates and deadlines are stricken; all pending motions are

denied as moot. Civil Case Terminated.Mailed notice(air, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-02358 Document #: 31 Filed: 12/21/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:100
Addendum to Emp. Agmt. for Philip A. Garcia



 



EXHIBIT 10.29 — ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



     This Addendum (the “Addendum”) is made effective as of the 12th day of
December, 2002 and is intended to amend a certain Employment Agreement (the
“Agreement”) by and between Erie Indemnity Company and Philip A. Garcia
effective as of December 16, 1997.


     WHEREAS, the Company has determined that it is in the best interest of the
Company and its Shareholders to secure the continued employment of the
Executive in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; and


     WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has previously considered
and agreed to extend the term of the Agreement from its original term; and


     WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company at its meeting of December
10, 2002 has again agreed to extend the term of the Agreement for a period of
one (1) additional year as contained herein; and


     WHEREAS, the Executive is agreeable to the extension of the Agreement.


     NOW, THEREFORE, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as
follows:


     1.     Paragraph 1 of the Agreement with respect to the Term is hereby amended
by extending the Term to expire on December 15, 2004.


     2.     All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force
and effect.



 


	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ATTEST:

 	 	ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY

 
	/s/	Jan R. Van Gorder

Jan R. Van Gorder

Secretary	 	By:	/s/	
F. William Hirt

F. William Hirt

Chairman of the Board
	 
	WITNESS:
 	 	 
	/s/	Cori Coccarelli

Cori Coccarelli

Executive Secretary	 	 	/s/	
Philip A. Garcia

Philip A. Garcia

786 Stockbridge Drive

Erie, PA 16505




53
#### Jas. L. Anderson, &c., *v.*N. D. Hampton, &c.

Appeal from County Court in all Proceedings for Division of Lands^ — Does not Lie to Court of Appeals.

APPEAL PROM LIVINGSTON CIRCUIT COURT.

October 27, 1870.

*Bush & Bush, for appellant.*

*Greer, for appellee.*

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Williams :

In the case of Clark vs. Lusk, 1 Metcalfe 447, it was held that an appeal would lie to this court from the judgment of a county court, in cases in which the same might have been prosecuted to the circuit court of the county. Section 20, Civil Code, authorizes appeals to the circuit court from the judgment of county courts in all proceedings .for the division of lands and slaves. This appeal should have been prosecuted to the Livingston circuit court, and hence we have no jurisdiction of the same. The appeal must therefore be dismissed.
No. 13,984.

#### The New Albany and Eastern Railway Company *v.*Day.

Filed Feb. *15, 1889.*

From the Floyd Circuit Court.

*A. Dowling,*for appellant.

*E. G. Henry, C. L. Jewett*and *H. E. Jewett,*for appellee.

Elliott, C. J. —

Affirmed on the authority of *New Albany, etc., R.W. Co.*v. *Day, ante,*p. 337.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Rachael Whitefield","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rachaellwhitefield-2-2-2\/","title":"Loral O\u2019Hara","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"iepsUU6H0N\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/loral-ohara\/\">Loral O\u2019Hara<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/loral-ohara\/embed\/#?secret=iepsUU6H0N\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Loral O\u2019Hara” — NASA\" data-secret=\"iepsUU6H0N\" 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\/06\/jsc2017e114808_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
Case: 1:20-cv-02649 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/01/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1
Case: 1:20-cv-02649 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/01/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:2
Case: 1:20-cv-02649 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/01/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:3
Case: 1:20-cv-02649 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/01/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:4
Case: 1:20-cv-02649 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/01/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:5
9296.

#### Campbell *v.*Redwine Brothers.

Jenkins, J.

1. A factor is one who *not*only receives goods and mercandise for hire, but, being entrusted with the possession, control, and disposal of the goods of Ms principal for a commission, has a lien for all advances made thereon and expenses incurred in respect thereto. In order to liquidate such demands, he may, as a general rule, and in *456accordance with the usages of trade, sell a sufficiency of the goods so entrusted (Civil Code of 1910, § 3502; *Whigham*v. *Fountain,*132 *Ga.*277, 63 S. E. 1115); but even though the factor’s agency be thus coupled with an interest, if there should be an express contract whereby the goods are to be held until a sale is authorized, the factor is bound by the terms of the agreement as actually made, and is liable to the owner for any damages which may be sustained by reason of an unauthorized sale. *Wood*v. *Jones,*10 *Ga. App.*735 (73 S. E. 1099).

Decided July 9, 1918.

Certiorari; from Fayette superior court—Judge Searcy. . September 19, 1917.

*W. B. Hollingsworth,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. W. Culpepper,*contra.

2. “A pledge, or pawn, is property deposited with "another as security for the payment of a debt” (Civil Code of 1910, § 3528; *Citizens Banking Co.*v. *Peacock,*103 *Ga.*171, 29 S. E. 752) ; and unless otherwise provided by contract, property so received can not be sold by the pledgee until after thirty days’ notice to the pledgor of his intention to sell; and the sale must be in. public, fairly conducted, and to the highest bidder. Civil Code, § 3530; *Falliday*v. *Bank of Stewart County,*112 *Ga.*461 (37 S. E. 721).

3. Under the evidence in this case the receipt of the cotton by the plaintiffs “in trust,” as security for a debt of the defendant, was a pledge or pawn. Whether a sale was authorized at the time the sale was made by the pledgees was a matter of dispute, under the testimony; there was no dispute that they failed to comply with the requirements of law governing the sale of property pledged; neither was it denied that the defendant received full credit for the actual value of the property at ' the time of the sale. *Feld:'*Where a suit is brought by a pledgee for the balance due on an obligation, after giving credit for the net proceeds from the sale of the property pledged, the defendant can elect to 'set up by way of recoupment a conversion of the property, by showing non-compliance with the rules governing such a sale; and the measure of damages is the difference between the amount of the credit allowed and the actual value of the property at the time of the sale. In a eaqe in which the jury is authorized to find that the sale was made at a time when it could be legally effected, non-compliance with the statutory requirements governing the sale will not authorize the defendant to recover by way of recoupment the difference between the valué of the property at the time of the sale and its value at a-subsequent date. *Waring*v. *Gaskill,*95 *Ga.*731 (2), 732 (22 S. E. 659); *Harrell*v. *Citizens Banking Co.,*111 *Ga.*846 (36 S. E. 460).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Wade, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.*