alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### R. H. Philpot *v.*L. B. Fields, Adm’r, etc.

Injunction — Liability of Sureties on Bond'.

The sureties on an injunction bond are under no obligation to pay the balance due from one estate to the other upon a settlement of claims not involved in the issue made in .the action in which the injunction was granted.

APPEAL FROM ADAIR CIRCUIT COURT.

October 16, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

The.sureties in the injunction bond undertook to. pay the damages the appellant’s intestate might sustain in the event the injunction was wrongfully obtained.

The order granting the injunction restrained the appellee’s intestate from collecting certain notes and particularly one on Cravens, as it was ascertained that Philpot could make title to. certain slaves purchased of him by Cravens. The present appellant and ap-pellee, the one being the legal representative of Cravens and the other the representative of Philpot, ascertaining that there were other matters of difference between them affecting the two estates, executed an agreement entered of record in this injunction suit by which all the matters in dispute between them as the administrators of these estates were referred to H. C. Baker as arbitrator for the settlement. This arbitrator made a settlement of these conflicting claims resulting in an indebtedness on the part of Craven’s estate to Philpot’s estate of $599.87. This award was reported to- court and made the judgment in the case. The agreement by which these *205controversies were submitted to Baker shows that other claims for considerable sums of money were be arbitrated and the award shows these claims in no wise connected with the suit were adjusted and in prosecuting the claims upon the one side of every character against the balance due appellant as administrator. These sureties are under no obligation by reason of this injunction bond to pay the balance due from' one of these estates to the other upon a settlement of claims not involved in the issue made in the action in which the injunction was granted. The fact that the amount found due by the award might probably be less than the damages awarded on the dissolution is immaterial. These sureties were no parties to the litigation except so far as they were liable on the injunction bond. They gave no consent to the adjustment of these claims by an arbitrator and the award made the judgment of the court, showing upon its face that it was based upon claim after claim not involved in the action, relieves them from liability. The appellant by the judgment fails to show that any damages were sustained by reason of the injunction. If this judgment was held as conclusive on the sureties, still no recovery could be had as the judgment recites that no damages have been sustained on account of the injunction. There was no judgment, enjoined and the condition of the bond was only to pay what damages Philpot sustained by reason of his being restrained from collecting the notes.

*Russell, Rveritt, for appellant.*

*Garnett, Baker, for appellee.*

Judgment is *affirmed.*
## F IFTH 

## D ISTRIC T 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE O F 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D 20 23-1676 LT Case No

. 20 21

- CA -000486

_____________________________ L Y NDA K

YLE , Appellant,

v. S CHOOL B OARD OF H ERNANDO C OUNTY , Appellee.

_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Hernando County. Don Barbee, Jr ., Judge. Gary L. Printy, Jr., of The Printy Law Firm, Tampa, for Appellant.
Allison E. Bunker and Lisa J. Augspurger, of Bush & Augspurger , P.A., Orlando, and Timothy J. Ross, II , of Bush & A ugspurger, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee. May 7 , 2 024
P ER C URIAM

. A FFIRMED

. E DWARDS , C.J. , and J AY and M AC I VER , JJ., concur
.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331
.

_____________________________
Order filed July 1, 2021 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-20-00175-CR

____________

JACOBE DANTE PAYTON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 400th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 17-DCR-077001A

ORDER

This court has determined, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 

34.5(f) and 34.6(g)(2), that it must inspect the originals of State's Exhibits 108 and 

109, videos.
The clerk of the 400th District Court is directed to deliver to the Clerk of this 

court the original of State's Exhibits 108 and 109, videos, on or before July 15, 2021.

The Clerk of this court is directed to receive, maintain, and keep safe these original 

exhibits; to deliver them to the justices of this court for their inspection; and, upon 

completion of inspection, to return the originals of State's Exhibits 108 and 109, 

videos, to the clerk of the 400th District Court.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Zimmerer.
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS


EX-32.1


Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Gregory F. Kowal, Chief Executive Officer of Mera Pharmaceuticals, certify that (1) Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.s Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended July 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 3 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended July 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.   Date:   September 14, 2006  /s/Gregory F. Kowal ---------------------------------------- Gregory F. Kowal Chief Executive Officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
DRAFT Agenda

Speaker List/Agenda for June 23, 2022 IEG General, Annual Meeting

Updated 4/11/2022

James R. Matey, james.matey@nist.gov

First Name Last Name Email or POC

Meeting Services

Technician jhynes@NIST.GOV

James Matey james.matey@nist.gov

Craig Watson craig.watson@nist.gov

James Matey james.matey@nist.gov

Angela Elliot aelliott@fbi.gov

Bethany Retton blretton@fbi.gov

Stephanie Schuckers sschucke@clarkson.edu

John Daugman John.Daugman@cl.cam.ac.uk

Pat Flynn flynn@nd.edu

Arun Ross rossarun@cse.msu.edu

Shahram Orandi shahram.orandi@nist.gov

Stephanie Schuckers sschucke@clarkson.edu

Stergios Papadakis Stergios.Papadakis@jhuapl.edu

Adam Czajka aczajka@nd.edu

Arun Ross rossarun@cse.msu.edu

Patrick Grother patrick.grother@nist.gov

James Matey james.matey@nist.gov

Affiliation

NIST

NIST

NIST

FBI

FBI

Clarkson

Cambridge

Notre Dame

Michigan

NIST

Clarkson

APL

Notre Dame

Michigan

NIST

NIST

Citizenship

US

US

US

US

US

US

US

US

US

US

US

US

Poland

US

US

US

Title/Topic

Introductions

Blue Jeans Active to Test Login

Review of Blue Jeans for Participants

Housekeeping

Welcome To NIST

Updates/Progress Reports

IEG: Status Update/Progress Report

NGI - Iris Service

OSAC: Iris Task Group: Status Update

Biometric Educational Videos -- update

Break

Technical Discussions

Biometric Entropy, Information Capacity, and Iris Recognition

Iris Datasets for Iris Examiner Training

Synthetic Iris: Using GANs to generate realistic iris images

Break - Lunch

New ideas in camera certification

Update on iris recognition for children

IARPA Odin Program: Iris Presentation Attack Detection

Do you want a better iris presentation attack detection method? Tell it

where to look

Periocular Biometrics: Cross-Modal Face to Iris Matching

Break

NIST: IREX Updates + Twins Details TBD

NIST: IREX Update + Twins including face and finger

Closing Remarks

Start

Order Time

1

2 08:30

3 08:40

4 08:50

5 08:55

6 09:00

7 09:00

8 09:10

9 09:30

10 09:50

11 09:50

12 10:00

13 10:00

14 10:30

15 11:00

16 11:30

17 12:00

18 12:30

19 13:00

20 13:30

21 14:00

22 14:30

23 14:40

24 14:40

25 15:15

Length (min)

10

10

5

5

0

10

20

20

10

10

0

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

10

0

35

5
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CAPITAL
GROWTH, INC. JUNE 30, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,779
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,779
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,779
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,643
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        48,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    (76,864)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,779
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,450)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,550)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,550)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM UNITED
CAPITAL  CORP.'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES, THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                           DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                            8,154
<SECURITIES>                                                     14,290
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     8,209
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        390
<INVENTORY>                                                       4,339
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 34,811
<PP&E>                                                            9,603
<DEPRECIATION>                                                    4,917
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                  126,112
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            24,603
<BONDS>                                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                                           0
<COMMON>                                                            515
<OTHER-SE>                                                       51,903
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                    126,112
<SALES>                                                          32,170
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 58,519
<CGS>                                                            22,260
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    46,245
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 (5,035)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  962
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  18,308
<INCOME-TAX>                                                      7,725
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              10,583
<DISCONTINUED>                                                    4,849
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                       0
<CHANGES>                                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     15,432
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                      2.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      2.92
        

</TABLE>
#### William N. Shelton, etc., *v.*Paulina Shelton, etc.

Wills — Life Estate With Contingent Remainder.

A will held to grant to a tenant in possession of land a life estate with contingent remainder to others- dependent on their surviving the tenant.

APPEAL FROM BOYLE CIRCUIT COURT.

January *4,*1873.

*255
      *Vanwinkle, C. H. Rodes, for appellants.*

*Durham & Jacobs, for appellees.*

Opinion by

Judge Hardin :

This court concurs with the circuit court in its judgment, except in the construction therein given to the second clause of Thomas' Shelton’s will. As to that provision we are of the opinion that the intention of the testator was to devise to his two daughters, Jane St. Clair and Mary P. Stone, the land purchased of Bryant, to take effect and vest in them severally upon their surviving the tenant for life, Paulina Shelton, but with an alternative devise to. the bodily heirs of either of them who might not survive the tenant for life; and that the title in fee simple will become vested absolutely in the one or the other persons or class of devisees., at the death of the said Paulina, or pass to the testator’s heirs at law, depending upon the contingency indicated. *Robb v. Belt, etc.,*12 B. Monroe 643.

Wherefore the judgment, being inconsistent with this construction of the will, it is reversed and the cause remanded with instructions to render.a judgment in conformity to' this opinion.
#### Commonwealth by Robert Bagby *v.*William Little and Others.

Ferries — Duties of Ferryman — Remedy of Persons Injured.

In the absence of an order of the county court permitting plaintiff as relator to sue the defendant ferryman, plaintiff must disclose some interest in himself, showing that his rights have been affected In some way because of the failure of defendant to conduct and keep. ihis ferry as required by law, plaintiff’s remedy for mere injury to •himself being by acting on the ferryman’s 'bond, and not the revocation of the license.

*441Ferries — Violation of Duties — General Charge.

Where, in a proceeding against a ferryman for failure to comply with the law, the charge is a general one that defendant has failed to comply with the law, it is too general and indefinite to support ■the proceeding.

APPEAL PROM GREENUP CIRCUIT COURT.

February 8, 1873.

S'. *L.*Moore, *Dtdin, for appellant.*

*Ireland,*Phister, *for appellees.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

In the absence of any order of the county court permitting the appellant to prosecute this proceeding as relator, he must disclose some interest in himself by showing that his rights have been affected in some way on account of the failure of the appellees to conduct and keep their ferry as required by law, and even then for the mere injury to the appellant the remedy should be on the bond, and not by way of revoking the franchise.

Conceding, however, that he had the right to institute the proceeding, or that his information gave to the county court the power and right to adjudicate on the question, still there is no such statement of facts in the notice of the intended motion as constitutes any cause of complaint. The notice fails to specify in what manner the appellees have failed to comply with the law. They may have all the boats required by the county court and still not a sufficient number to accommodate the public.

The name of the person is not given 'who has been delayed on account of the negligence of the appellees as ferrymen, nor is there any allegation, showing in what particular the wharf is insufficient. The substance of all the charges is, that the appellees have failed to comply with the law. Such a statement is too general and indefinite to base such a proceeding on, and the circuit court acted properly in reversing the judgment of the county court. That court, however, should have been directed by the judgment of the circuit' court to set aside the order revoking the grant and dismissing the proceeding without prejudice.

The judgment of the court below is therefore *affirmed*on the original appeal and *reversed*on the cross-appeal and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4594 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4594

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to double the maximum new 
              market tax credits, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 16, 2004

Mr. Jefferson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to double the maximum new 
              market tax credits, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``New Markets Tax Credit Enhancement 
Act of 2004''.

SEC. 2. DOUBLING OF NEW MARKETS TAX CREDIT.

    Paragraph (1) of section 45D(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to national limitation on amount of investments 
designated) is amended by striking subparagraphs (C) and (D) and 
inserting the following new subparagraphs:
                    ``(C) $2,000,000,000 for 2004,
                    ``(D) $4,000,000,000 for 2005,
                    ``(E) $7,000,000,000 for 2006, and
                    ``(F) $7,000,000,000 for 2007.''

SEC. 3. AUTHORITY TO TARGET LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS.

    Subsection (e) of section 45D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(defining low-income community) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new paragraph:
            ``(4) Targeted population.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
        regulations under which 1 or more targeted populations (within 
        the meaning of section 3(20) of the Riegle Community 
        Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1974 (12 U.S.C. 
        4702(20))) may be treated as low-income communities without 
        regard to paragraph (2). Such regulations shall include 
        procedures for determining which entities are qualified active 
        low-income community businesses with respect to such 
        populations.''
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                     SUBSIDIARIES OF MILLIPORE CORPORATION

Pursuant to Item 601, Paragraph 21, clause (ii) of Regulation S-K, the following
list excludes subsidiaries who conduct no business operations or which have no
significant assets.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

COMPANY NAME                             JURISDICTION OF ORGANIZATION
------------                             ----------------------------
<S>                                     <C>
Millipore Asia Ltd.                           Delaware
  Millipore Korea Ltd.                        Korea
  Millipore Singapore, Pte. Ltd.              Singapore
Millipore Cidra, Inc.                         Delaware
Millipore Intertech, (V.I.), Inc.             U.S. Virgin Is.
Millipore (Canada) Ltd.                       Canada
Millipore S.A. de C.V.                        Mexico
Millipore GesmbH                              Austria
  Millipore Kft                               Hungary
  Millipore S.R.O.                            Czech Republic
Millipore Investment Holdings Ltd.            Delaware
 Millipore International Holding
  Company B.V.                                Netherlands
  BCL Acquisition Corp.                       Delaware
     BioProcessing Limited Corporation        United Kingdom
  Millipore Japan Company L.L.C.              Delaware
     Nihon Millipore Limited                  Japan
  Millipore S.A./N.V.                         Belgium
  Millipore (U.K.) Ltd.                       United Kingdom
  Millipore S.A.                              France
  Millipore Ireland B.V.                      Netherlands
     Millipore Dublin International
      Finance Company                         Ireland
  Millipore GmbH                              West Germany
  Millipore S.p.A.                            Italy
  Millipore A.B.                              Sweden
  Millipore AS                                Norway
  Millipore A.G.                              Switzerland
  Millipore A/S                               Denmark
  Millipore Australia Pty. Ltd.               Australia
  Millipore Iberica S.A.                      Spain
  Millipore I.E.C., Ltda.                     Brazil
  Millipore OY                                Finland
  Millipore B.V.                              The Netherlands
  Millipore China Ltd.                        Hong Kong

Millipore Pacific Limited                     Delaware
  Millipore (Suzhou) Filter Company
   Limited                                    Peoples Republic of China
Millicorp, Inc.                               Delaware
Minerva Insurance Co. Ltd.                    Bermuda
Vermeer                                       Ireland
</TABLE>