alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### John C. MONTUE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael E. PATTERSON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 99-17229.

D.C. # CV-98-2099-FCD(JFM).

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 14, 2001.*

Decided May 25, 2001.

Before PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and WARD LAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

John C. Montue, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) as frivolous and malicious. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). *See Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm the dismissal for the reasons stated in the Findings and Recommendations filed on June 9, 1999 and adopted by the district court by order of July 1, 1999.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

                        
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial  information  extracted from the Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the nine month fiscal  period ended January 31, 1998 and
the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter and nine months ended October
31,  1998 and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to such  financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<MULTIPLIER>                                             1,000
<S>                                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                      FEB-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                       OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                                  12,950
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            9,483
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        12,950
<PP&E>                                                     979
<DEPRECIATION>                                            (753)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          22,127
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    2,877
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                   (14)
<OTHER-SE>                                             (48,297)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           (22,127)
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           441
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         7,499
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         (7,057)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     (7,057)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                            (7,057)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            (0.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            (0.49)
        

</TABLE>
11214.

#### Rome Railway & Light Co. *v.*Foster.

Broyles, C. J.

1. The court erred in charging the jury as follows: “It is the duty of the motorman, in propelling a car through the public streets, to notice the presence of other vehicles and pedestrians ahead of his car-, and at all times be watchful to see that the way is clear; and where he has reason to apprehend danger, or should in the exercise of ordinary care become cognizant of danger, he should regulate the 'speed of his car, so that it may be quickly stopped should occasion require it.” This charge clearly intimated that a failure by the motorman to do the things enumerated would constitute negligence; and questions as to diligence and negligence are for determination by the jury and not by the court. *Columbus Railroad Co.*v. *Peddy,*120 *Ga.*590 (6) (48 S. E. 149).

2. There were some inaccuracies in the charge as to the .contentions of *174the parties, as complained of in the 1st special ground of the motion for a new trial.

Decided April 13, 1920.

Action for damages; from Floyd superior court-—Judge Wright. December 16, 1919.

*Dean & Dean, L. H. Covington,*for plaintiff in error.

*M. B. Eubanks,*contra.

3. None of the other instructions excepted to, when considered in connection with the remainder of the charge of the court, contains material error.

*4. The*verdict was amply authorized by *the*evidence, but, because of the errors in the charge referred to above, another trial of the case is demanded.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Gary L. Dreher, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AMDL, Inc. for the period ended June30, 2007; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periodspresented in this quarterly report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the small business issuer and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisquarterly report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s first fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, thesmall business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sauditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: August 20, 2007   /s/ Gary L. Dreher   Gary L. Dreher  Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, James W. Bernau, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Willamette Valley Vineyards Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects
the financial condition and results of operations of Willamette Valley
Vineyards Inc.

By:	 /s/ James W. Bernau
Name: James W. Bernau
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
Ref. 13-008
11237.

#### Cuba *v.*The State.

Decided April 14, 1920.

Indictment for assault with intent to murder—conviction of shooting at another; from Eulton superior court. — Judge Humphries. December 6,1919.

*H. A. Allen,*for plaintiff in error.

*John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, E. A. Stephens,*contra.

Bloodworth, J.

1. There is no merit in the ground of the motion for a new trial in which it was contended ¡that the defendant’s right of cross-examination was unduly restricted by the court.

2. The court did not err in charging the jury- on the law as to shooting at another.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
RB

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0420

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CHARLES MICHAEL BYRNE,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, and

good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to and

including November 16, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

October 13 2020

10/13/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0420
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1
                                                                    ------------

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Shareowners of Monsanto Company:

We have audited the accompanying statement of consolidated financial position of
Monsanto Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the
related statements of consolidated income, cash flows, shareowners' equity and
comprehensive income (loss) for each of the two years in the period ended
December 31, 2001 (not presented separately herein). These financial statements
are the responsibility of the company's management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of Monsanto Company and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the results of their operations and their
cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2001, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.

As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, in 2000
Monsanto Company changed its method of recognizing revenue to conform to the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, Revenue
Recognition in Financial Statements.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche  LLP

 St. Louis, Missouri
 February 5, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>          MAR-31-1999

<CASH>                           20,581 
<SECURITIES>                       0    
<RECEIVABLES>                     6,504 
<ALLOWANCES>                       0    
<INVENTORY>                      34,529 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 63,616 
<PP&E>                          358,573 
<DEPRECIATION>                   46,442 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  422,560 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           154,032 
<BONDS>                         170,733 
<COMMON>                           0    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0    
<PREFERRED>                        0    
<OTHER-SE>                     (187,115)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    422,560 
<SALES>                           8,083 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  8,546 
<CGS>                             3,602 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     7,605 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    546 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   0    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                7,116 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (6,721)
<INCOME-TAX>                      2,596 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (4,125)
<DISCONTINUED>                     0    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    0    
<CHANGES>                          0    
<NET-INCOME>                     (4,125)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      0    
<EPS-DILUTED>                      0    

        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

###### 47 CFR Parts 2 and 15

          - [GN Docket No. 12-268; FCC 14-50]

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

# ACTION:

Final rule; announcement of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

                        On August 15, 2014, the Commission released a Report and Order, “Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions.” This document announces an effective date for several sections in the final regulations that appeared in the                         **Federal Register**                         on August 15, 2014 (79 FR 48442).                    

# DATES:

47 CFR 2.1033(c)(19)(iii); 15.713(b)(2)(iv) and 15.713(h)(10), published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on August 15, 2914 (79 FR 48442) are effective December 11, 2014.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Nancy Brooks, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-2454 or email                         *Nancy.Brooks@fcc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Background

The final regulations that are the subject of this document relate to “Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions” under the dates section for §§ 2.1033(c)(19)(iii); 15.713(b)(2)(iv) and 15.713(h)(10) of the rules.

## Need for Correction

                    As published, the                     **Dates**                     section contains errors, which may prove to be misleading.                

                    In the                     **Dates**                     section of the                     **Federal Register**                     §§ 2.1033(c)(19)(iii); 15.713(b)(2)(iv) and 15.713(h)(10) were inadvertently listed with sections that were not yet effective. These sections do not contain new or modified information collection requirements that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget.                

Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene H. Dortch,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2014-28896 Filed 12-10-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### Thos. B. Cowan *v.*Jno. Wm. Henry.

Pleading — Construction of.

In case of doubt as to tte meaning of the language used in the pleading, it must be construed most strictly against the pleader.

APPEAL FROM MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT.

June 27, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The answer in this case is clearly insufficient. It raises no issue except as to whether or not the note or bill is a counterfeit. The statement that defendant denies he passed said one hundred dollar bill or any other bill for that amount would have been good except for the qualification contained in the concluding portion of the sentence, which explains the denial to mean that said bill or any other bill which appellant passed to appellee “was not a genuine bill or a counterfeit.” It is not necessary to determine whether the answer can be so punctuated as to make it amount to a denial of other facts than that the note is a counterfeit. In matters of doubt a pleading must be construed most strictly *49against the pleader. So this answer will and ought to be construed.

*Apperson, for appellant.*

*Holt, for appellee.*

The note was admitted to be a counterfeit, and there being no other issue in the case it was error to dismiss appellant’s petition.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

Appellee should be allowed to amend his answer if he offers to do so within a reasonable time.
**Exhibit99.1**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Raymond J. Pacini, being the Chief ExecutiveOfficer of California Coastal Communities, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifypursuant to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002that, to the best of my knowledge as of the date set forth below (i) theCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002which accompanies this certification (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| Dated:   November 12, 2002 | */s/**Raymond J. Pacini* |   |
|---------------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|                            | Raymond J. Pacini        |
|                            | Chief Executive Officer  |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHARLES ROBINSON, :

Petitioner, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 09-00488-WS-B

J. C. GILES, :

Respondent. :

JUDGMENT

It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this action be

dismissed without prejudice due to Petitioner’s failure to comply

with 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) and that Petitioner is not entitled

to a certificate of appealability.

DONE this 1st of March, 2010.

 s/WILLIAM H. STEELE 

 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00488-WS-B Document 18 Filed 03/01/10 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 142 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 142

 To repeal the restriction on the use of funds by the Internal Revenue 
  Service to bring transparency to the political activity of certain 
                        nonprofit organizations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2023

  Mr. Crow (for himself, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Norton, Ms. 
Barragan, Mr. Connolly, and Ms. Tokuda) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To repeal the restriction on the use of funds by the Internal Revenue 
  Service to bring transparency to the political activity of certain 
                        nonprofit organizations.

    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 ``End Dark Money Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF RESTRICTION OF USE OF FUNDS BY INTERNAL REVENUE 
              SERVICE TO BRING TRANSPARENCY TO POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF 
              CERTAIN NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.

    Section 123 of the Financial Services and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 2023 (division E of Public Law 117-328) shall have 
no force or effect during fiscal year 2023.
                                 <all>
```