alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: Case Number: 

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for: 

Attorney name (type or print): 

Firm: 

Street address: 

City/State/Zip: 

Bar ID Number: Telephone Number: 

 Yes No 

 Yes No 

 Yes No 

 Yes No 

(See item 3 in instructions) 

Email Address: 

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case? 

Are you acting as local counsel in this case? 

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar? 

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? 

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel 

Appointed Counsel 

If appointed counsel" are you 

a Federal Defender 

 CJA Panel Attorney 

______________________________________________________________________ 

In order to appear before this $ourt an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this $ourt’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 &.%.$#§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath. 

Executed on 

Attorney signature: S/ 

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.) 

Revised 8/1/2015 

Alhummza Stokes, v. City of

Chicago, et al., 20-cv-4716

Ronald Watts

Ahmed A. Kosoko

Johnson & Bell, LTD

33 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2700

Chicago, Illinois 60603

6283290 312-372-0770

KosokoA@jbltd.com

February 15, 2021

Ahmed A. Kosoko

Case: 1:20-cv-04716 Document #: 27 Filed: 02/15/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:73
**EXHIBIT 32.2****CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, theundersigned officer of Xenonics Holdings, Inc (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the best ofher knowledge:     (i)the Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of the Company for the fiscal year ended September30, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.     Dated:January 23, 2006 /s/ Donna G. Lee     Donna G. Lee    Chief Financial Officer
exv10w9



 





EXHIBIT
10.9




REVOLVING NOTE




			
	$50,000,000
	 	Dated as of July 20, 2005






     FOR
VALUE RECEIVED, WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION, an Illinois corporation (the
“Maker”) promises to pay to the order of LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a
national banking association (the “Bank”) the lesser of the principal sum of FIFTY
MILLION DOLLARS ($50,000,000), or the aggregate unpaid principal amount outstanding under the
Loan Agreement dated even date herewith (as amended from time to time, the “Loan
Agreement”) between the Bank and the Maker at the maturity or maturities and in the
amount or amounts as stated on the records of the Bank together with interest (computed on
actual days elapsed on the basis of a 360 day year) on any and all principal amounts
outstanding hereunder from time to time from the date hereof until maturity. Interest shall
be payable at the rates of interest and the times set forth in the Loan Agreement. All unpaid
principal, and accrued interest, if not paid sooner, shall be due and payable in full on June
1,2006.



     This Note shall be available for direct advances.



     Principal and interest shall be paid to the Bank at its office at 135 South LaSalle
Street, Chicago, Illinois 60603, or at such other place as the holder of this Note may
designate in writing to the Maker. This Note may be prepaid in whole or in part as provided
for in the Loan Agreement.



     This Note evidences indebtedness incurred under the Second Amended and Restated Loan
Agreement dated as of April 30,2003, as amended from time to time, between the Maker and the
Bank, to which reference is hereby made for a statement of the terms and conditions under
which the due date of the Note or any payment thereon may be accelerated. The holder of this
Note is entitled to all of the benefits provided for in the Loan Agreement.



     The
Maker agrees that in action or proceeding instituted to collect or enforce collection
of this Note, the amount on the Bank’s records shall be conclusive and binding evidence,
absent demonstrable error, of the unpaid principal balance of this Note.



     This Note is in replacement, a combination and substitution of, but not repayment for, a
Revolving Note of the Borrower dated June 1,2005 maturing June 1,2006, in the principal
amount of $25,000,000 and a Revolving Note dated April 30,2003, maturing February 27,2006, in
the principal amount of $25,000,000, and is in no way intended to
constitute a novation
therefor.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION  
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	David a Dykstra    8/26/05	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Its:
	 	Senior EVP & COO
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-07-321-CV

ERIC EDGAR CHASE AND ALL OCCUPANTS	APPELLANT

	V.

CITIMORTGAGE, INC. SUCCESSOR	APPELLEE

BY REASON OF MERGER WITH CITIFINANCIAL 

MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF DENTON COUNTY

	------------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	On November 15, 2007, we notified appellant that the trial court clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal had informed this court that arrangements had not been made to pay for the clerk’s record as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2).  TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(a)(2).  We stated we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant, within fifteen days, made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record and provided this court with proof of payment.  

	Because appellant has not made payment arrangements for the clerk’s record, it is the opinion of the court that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.   Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.  See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of the appeal, for which let execution issue.

								PER CURIAM 		 	

PANEL D:  LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and HOLMAN, JJ.

DELIVERED:  December 13, 2007
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

EL PASO COUNTY COMMUNITY

COLLEGE DISTRICT

,

Appellant,

v.

ROSA GONZALEZ

,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

'

' No. 08

- 1 3

- 00258

- CV

Appeal from the

243 rd Judicial District Court

of El Paso County , Texas

(TC# 2008

- 3813 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellee ’ s third motion for extension of time to file the brief until

September 30

, 2014

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE

APPELLEE ’ S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Sam J. Legate , the Appellee ’ s Attorney, prepare the

App ellee ’ s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before September 30 , 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1 6 th day of September , 2014

.

PER CURIAM
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MOBARK ABDELRAHMAN and NAJAT ALOMAIRI,

Appellants,

v.

CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-2526

[November 17, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Gerald Joseph Curley, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502019CA016561XXXXMB.

Scott J. Edwards of Scott J. Edwards, P.A., Boca Raton, and Vyacheslav 

Borshchukov of Vyacheslav Borshchukov, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellants.

Maureen G. Pearcy of Paul R. Pearcy, P.A., Miami, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, GERBER and ARTAU., JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Samuel M. Richardson *v.*Richard Arrowsmith, etc.

Alteration of Instruments — Evidence—Competency.

Evidence conducing to show that a note had been so altered as to make it payable to S. M. instead of I. L, is competent under the charge of fraud.

APPEAL FROM BATH CIRCUIT COURT.

February 5, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

The amended answer’ filed by the two Arrowsmiths and Dodson showed that the amount sued for by appellant had been attached by Stewart, without collusion .with them, and was sufficient to authorize the amount to require Stewart to appear and assert his claim thereto.

The answer and cross-petition of Stewart sets up his proceeding in the Nicholas Circuit Court, and makes the record of his suit against I. L. Richardson pending in said court an exhibit.

Although he does not in terms allege that his judgment against *428I. L. Richardson remained unpaid, the facts appearing from his answer and exhibits show that such was the case. Appellant accepted the issue as tendered by Stewart, replying only to so much of the cross-petition as charged a fraudulent collusion between himself and his father. He did not demur to the cross-petition and throughout the entire proceeding both he and his father treated the judgment in the Nicholas Circuit Court as unpaid, and prepared their defense upon that hypothesis. The proceeding by *Stewart v. I. L. Richardson,*under the provisions of the 474th section of the Civil Code, was properly instituted in the court-in which the judgment was rendered upon a return of no property found in that county.

*Reid & Stone, for áppellmt.*

*Hargis, for appellee.*

The evidence conducing to show that an alteration had been made in the note so as to make it payable to S. M. instead of I. L. Richardson, was competent under the charge of fraud. Such an alteration, if made, was certainly fraudulent as tO' I. L. Richardson’s creditors.

It does not matter that the horse was sold to Arrowsmith before the judgment of Stewart was recovered. We are satisfied that the claim1 of the son to the note is unfounded, and that whether it was originally made payable to the son, or afterward changed, the father was acting in bad faith towards his creditors.

It is certain that he either changed the note after it was executed or else imposed upon the payees thereof, because they certainly supposed that they were buying the mare from him and agreeing to pay the purchase price to him.

Judgment *affirmed.*
10045.

#### Bellamy *v.*The State.

Decided November 7, 1918.

Indictment for sale of liquor; from Candler superior court— Judge Hardeman. July 22, 1918.

*Kirkland & Kirkland,*for plaintiff in error.

*Walter F. Grey, solicitor-general,*contra.

Harwell, J.

1. In his motion for a continuance the defendant did not comply with all the requirements of the Penal Code (1910), § 987, necessary to make a complete showing, and, therefore, the court did not err in overruling , the motion.

2. The court correctly instructed the jury upon the theory of agency, raised by the defendant upon the trial, but the jury evidently rejected this theory and found the defendant to be the seller ’ of the whisky.

3. There was evidence to authorize the verdict, and, it having been approved by the trial judge, this court can not interfere.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*
#### S. Lawson *v.*Gardner & Co.

Appeal — Reversal—Instruction.

Where the evidence does not show a right of recovery against a principal on the theory that the purchaser was an agent of .the principal, it was held reversible error to give an instruction based on such theory.

*289APPEAL, FROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT,

January 11, 1873.

/. *W. Gorin, for appellant.*

Opinion by

Judge Hardin:

It is neither alleged nor proved that when selling the goods the plaintiff knew that Stewart was the agent of the defendant; but the account sued on shows the sales were made to Stewart, and presumptively on his credit; but the theory of the plaintiff’s case seems to be that, having sold the goods to Stewart, they had a right, nevertheless, to hold the defendant liable oh discovering that Stewart was in fact his agent, and bought the goods for him.

The evidence does not conduce to show a right of recovery except upon this theory. Wherefore the second instruction which the court gave for the plaintiff, however correct it may have been, if there was evidence that the sales were made and the credit given to the defendant himself on the faith of the known agency of Stewart, was abstract in this case; and it was misleading and erroneous in submitting to the jury the irrelevant question whether at the time the goods were sold the supposed pre-existing agency of Stewart had or not been terminated with public or private notice thereof to the plaintiffs. We need express no opinion on the question as to tKe sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.

But, solely for the error in giving the second instruction, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial on principles not inconsistent with this opinion.

-, *for appellee.*
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4109

AN ACT

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on

a new Form 1040S.

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4109

AN ACT

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new

Form 1040S.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 4109 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Simple Tax for Seniors

3 Act of 2004’’.

4 SEC. 2. FORM 1040S FOR SENIORS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury (or

6 the Secretary’s delegate) shall make available a form, to

7 be known as ‘‘Form 1040S’’, for use by individuals to file

8 the return of tax imposed by chapter 1 of the Internal

9 Revenue Code of 1986. Such form shall be as similar as

10 practicable to Form 1040EZ, except that—

11 (1) the form shall be available to individuals

12 who have attained age 65 as of the close of the tax13 able year,

14 (2) the form may be used even if income for the

15 taxable year includes—

16 (A) social security benefits (as defined in

17 section 86(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of

18 1986),

19 (B) distributions from qualified retirement

20 plans (as defined in section 4974(c) of such

21 Code), annuities or other such deferred pay22 ment arrangements,

23 (C) interest and dividends, or

24 (D) capital gains and losses taken into ac25 count in determining adjusted net capital gain

26 (as defined in section 1(h)(3)), and
3

•HR 4109 EH

1 (3) the form shall be available without regard

2 to the amount of any item of taxable income or the

3 total amount of taxable income for the taxable year.

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The form required by sub5 section (a) shall be made available for taxable years begin6 ning after December 31, 2004.

Passed the House of Representatives June 2, 2004.

Attest:

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4046 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 4046

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 29, 2004

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 555 West 180th Street in New York, New York, as the ``Sergeant 
                    Riayan A. Tejeda Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 555 
West 180th Street in New York, New York, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda 
Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
10372.

#### Denton *v.*Wimberly.

Decided June 12, 1919.

Certiorari; from Bibb superior court—Judge Mathews. January 22, 1919.

*John R. L. Smith, Grady C. Harris,*for plaintiff in error.

*Sam B. Hunter, J. T. Hill,*contra.

Wade, C. J.

The *only*assignment of error in the petition for certiorari which is insisted upon here being that the verdict is contrary to law and to the evidence, and there being evidence to support the verdict, the judgment overruling the certiorari is

*Affirmed.*

*Jenkins and Luke, JJ., concur.*
#### Wesley Berry *v.*Lycha Hopkins, Adm’r.

Executors and Administrators — Dismissal of Action.

Under § 437 of the Civ. Code, an action to revive a judgment against a personal representative of a deceased judgment debtor is an action contemplated by such section, and where the necessary affidavit and demand has not been made before suit was instituted, the petition may be dismissed.

Executors and Administrators — Insufficiency of Assets.

If the assets of a decedent’s estate are insufficient to pay decedent’s debts, the administrator must resort to his equitable action authorized by Civ. Code,, R. S., ch. 40, § 10.

APPEAL FROM FLEMING CIRCUIT COURT.

February 25, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

An ordinary action under the provisions of the 437th section of the Civil Code to revive a judgment against a personal representative of a deceased judgment debtor is such a suit against a personal representative as is contemplated by the 437th section of the code, and as the necessary affidavit and demand had not been made before this suit was instituted the petition was properly dismissed as to Hopkins, administrator. *Curry's Adm’r v. Bryant’s Adm’r,*7 Bush 301.

Nor can appellant complain because it was dismissed as to the infant, Mary J. Hopkins. He had no right to have the judgment against his ancestor revived against her. The lands descending to her could not be sold even by a court of equity until the personal *516assets of her mother’s estate in the hands of the administrator had first been exhausted,

*J. W. Anderson, for appellant.*

*T. L. Given, for appellee.*

The petition infererttially but unmistakably shows that assets' of some sort and to some amount did come to his hands. If they are insufficient to pay appellant’s' debt, he must resort to his equitable action as authorized by Sections 465 and 466 of the Civil Code, Section 10, Chapter 40, Revised Statutes. A common law court will not aid him in subjecting the lands of the heir whilst there is personal estáte in the hands of the administrator still being administered.

The judgment dismissing appellant’s petition does not constitute a bar to future proceedings, although it does not state in terms that the dismissal was without prejudice.

It is apparent upon the face of the order that the cause was not heard upon its merits.

Judgment *affirmed.*
BENEFITS

Commercial Application:

Calibration services

Competitive Advantages:

Having such a system using a chip 

based on this process would allow 

one to calibrate resistors that have 

many different values as opposed to 

being able to calibrate at one value.

Eliminate your bulky equipment.

Improve your resistance uncertainty.

CONTACT

Technology Partnerships Office

National Institute of Standards and

Technology, Gaithersburg MD 20899

TPO@NIST.GOV

GATELESS P- N JUNCTION METROLOG 

Patent 11,474,134

DESCRIPTION

Problem:

We have solved the issue of using 

standard metal electrical contacts for 

connecting multiple devices 

composed of the same material.

Invention:

We provide the process of building a 

special device for resistance metrology 

that allows one to output many different 

quantum resistances (like a variable 

resistor).

A plan view of the gateless P-N 

junction metrolog
**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 Annual Report of True North Energy Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended April 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John I,
      Folnovic, 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;
                and





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





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.





/s/
      John
      I. Folnovic


Name:  John
      I.
      Folnovic


Title:  Chief
      Executive Officer


Date:  August
      10, 2006
#### ROBBINS v. UNION SECURITY INS. CO.

No. 256P97

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 436

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 23 July 1997.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**TIME AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Time America, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Thomas S. Bednarik, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Craig J. Smith, Vice President - Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.

 
| By:    | /s/ Thomas S. Bednarik                                                  |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Thomas S. Bednarik                                                      |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer                                   |
|   | May 14, 2004                                                            |
|   |                                                                    |
| By:    | /s/ Craig J. Smith                                                      |   |
|   | Craig J. Smith                                                          |   |
|   | Vice President - Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer |
|   | May 14, 2004                                                            |

 

----