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

SOUTHERN	DISTRICT	OF	ALABAMA

SOUTHERN	DIVISION

In	Re: )

)

RICHARD	D.	HORNE and	 )

PATRICIA	NELSON	HORNE, )

)

Debtors, )

)

MARY	BETH	MANTIPLY, )

) CIVIL	ACTION	NO.	13-00258-CB-B

Plaintiff/Appellant, )

)

v. )

)

PATRICIA	NELSON	HORNE, )

as	Personal	Representative	of	the )

Estate	of	RICHARD	D.	HORNE	and )

PATRICIA	NELSON	HORNE,	individually, )

)

Defendants/Appellees. )

JUDGMENT

Pursuant	to	separate	order	entered	this	date	granting	the	Motion	for	the	

Assessment	of	Additional	Appellate	Attorneys’	Fees,	it	is	hereby	ORDERED,	

ADJUDGED and	DECREED that	the	Defendants/Appellees,	Patricia	Nelson	Horne,	as	

Personal	Representative	of	the	Estate	of	Richard	D.	Horne,	and	Patricia	Nelson	

Horne,	individually,	recover	of	the	Plaintiff/Appellant,	Mary	Beth	Mantiply,	

additional	appellate	attorney’s	fees	in	the	amount	of	fourteen	thousand	nine	

hundred	eighteen	and	60/100ths	($14,918.60)	dollars.1

DONE this	the	19th day	of	January,	2016.

s/Charles	R.	Butler,	Jr.

Senior	United	States	District	Judge

																																																							 1 This	amount	is	in	addition	to	the	attorney’s	fee	judgment	dated	January	8,	

2014	in	the amount	of	$34,551.28.

Case 1:13-cv-00258-CB-B Document 98 Filed 01/20/16 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.01



CERTIFICATION



I, Michael S. Fields, Chief Executive Officer of the registrant, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of KANA Software, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in
the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.



|                       |  |  |  |                                          
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------
|                       |  | 
|Dated: August 26, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ MICHAEL S. FIELDS                    
|                       |  |  |  | Michael S. Fields Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Dean
Witter Diversified Futures Fund II L.P. and is qualified in its entirety
by references to such financial instruments.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                      11,608,825
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,941<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,816,840<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,816,840<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               671,464<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               670,496
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    968
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                968
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       968
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables include interest receivable of $37,853 and due from DWR
of $6,088.
<F2>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include net unrealized
gain on open contracts of $164,074.
<F3>Liabilities include redemptions payable of $690,859, accrued brokerage
commissions of $38,297, accrued management fees of $29,536 and accrued
transaction fees and costs of $2,373.
<F4>Total revenues include realized trading revenue of $416,375, net change
in unrealized of $3,881, and interest income of $251,208.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
FOR PUBLICATION

JUDICIAL COUNCIL

OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL

MISCONDUCT

No. 13-90073

ORDER

Filed August 13, 2013

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Complainant has filed an Emergency Motion to Stay

Proceedings Below captioned as a motion in this misconduct

proceeding. The misconduct complaint is pending before me

in my administrative capacity as presiding officer of the

Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit. The Judicial Council

is not a court and has no authority to interfere with judicial

proceedings. In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct,

630 F.3d 1262 (9th Cir. Jud. Council 2011). Complainant

cites 28 U.S.C. § 2106 but that statute only applies to

“court(s) of appellate jurisdiction,” which the Judicial

Council is not.

The emergency motion is denied. The misconduct

complaint is held in abeyance pending resolution of the

appellate proceedings in the underlying litigation. See

Commentary to Judicial-Conduct Rule 3 (“[C]onsideration

and disposition of a complaint under these Rules may be
2 IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

properly deferred by a chief judge until appellate proceedings

are concluded ... .”).

DENIED.
## FLORIDA SUPREME COURT

NOTICE OF CORRECTION

DATE: February 23

, 202 3

CASE OF: IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA PROBATE RULES

5.040, 5.330, and 5.930

DOCKET NO.: SC 22

- 1137

OPINION FILED: February 2

, 202 3

ATTENTION: ALL PUBLISHERS

THE FOLLOWING CORRECTION S H AVE BEEN MADE IN THE

ABOVE OPINION:

On page 8, line 4, “RULE 5.930” is now “RULE 5.930.”

On page 8, line 8

, the double underline was changed to single

underline in the space between “I,” and “ (affiant) ” in the oath.

SIGNED: OPINION CLERK
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    11,048,300,000
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                  55,800,000
<MORTGAGE>                               2,316,800,000
<REAL-ESTATE>                               16,500,000
<TOTAL-INVEST>                          14,543,200,000
<CASH>                                      51,100,000
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                         651,200,000
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                   1,615,300,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          25,714,700,000
<POLICY-LOSSES>                         13,556,100,000
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                             688,600,000
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                      441,500,000
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                            822,500,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      242,800,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       900,000
<OTHER-SE>                               2,004,900,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            25,714,700,000
<PREMIUMS>                                 624,300,000
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                        568,100,000
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                           1,500,000
<OTHER-INCOME>                             439,100,000
<BENEFITS>                                 857,300,000
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                 93,200,000
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                       386,100,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            219,000,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                79,000,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        133,400,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               133,400,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.47
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Forms S-8 No. 333-41542 and No. 333-72036) pertaining to the 1999
Equity Participation Plan of Golden Telecom, Inc. and in the Post Effective
Amendment No. 1 (Form S-3 No. 333-39260) to Registration Statement on Form S-1
and related Prospectus of Golden Telecom, Inc. of our report dated March 6,
2003, with respect to the financial statements of EDN Sovintel LLC, included in
the Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Golden Telecom, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2002.



/s/ Ernst & Young (CIS) Limited


Moscow, Russia
27 March 2003
#### J. G. Arnold *v.*Peter Smith.

Judicial Sale of Real Estate.

A judgment for the sale of real estate -will be reversed, where it fails to direct the manner of its advertisement.

City Assessments — Judgment.

Where the cost of a public improvement is assessed by the city council against a lot, it is error to render a personal judgment against the lot owner.

APPEAL PROM KENTON CHANCERY COURT.

September 15, 1875.

*Carlisle & Fotte, for appellant. Stevenson & O'Hara, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

It was error to fail to direct in the judgment the manner in which the sale should be advertised.

The cost of the work was assessed by the city council against the lot owned by Arnold. It was, therefore, error to render a personal judgment against him.

The petition avers that the ordinance directing the improvement to be made “was duly published in a newspaper circulated in the city of Covington, and being the same paper in which the ordinances passed by said council were then published. We cannot say that this mode of printing and circulating the said ordinance is not covered by the provisions of Sec. 6 of the act of March 2, 1850.

Arnold had no title to, or interest in the material in the pavement. His counterclaim, therefore, was properly dismissed.

For the two errors indicated the judgment is *reversed,*and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 
  

			
		
	Certificate No. *0*		Shares *0*

 Evolent Health, Inc. 

Incorporated Under the Laws of the State of Delaware 

Total Authorized Issue 

*0* Shares Par Value $0.01 Each 

Class A Common Stock 
 THIS IS TO
CERTIFY THAT
                                        
**Specimen**
                                         is
the owner of
                                         
                    **Zero (0)**
                                         
                    fully paid and non-assessable shares of the above Corporation transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder
hereof in person or by duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed. 
 WITNESS, the signatures of its duly
authorized officers. 
 DATED:                 , 20 

 

									
					
			  

PRESIDENT
				  

SECRETARY
		








 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall
be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations. 
  

							
				
	 TEN COM
 TEN ENT

JT TEN
		 -as tenants in common

-as tenants by the entireties

-as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common
		UNIF GIFT MIN ACT -		
                Custodian     
           

(Cust)                (Minor)

under Uniform Gifts to Minors

Act                       
         
 (State)


 Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 

For Value Received,              hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 

PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY 
 OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER 

OF ASSIGNEE 
  

			
	 		 
	
	 

 of the shares represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
                                        
its Attorney-in-Fact to transfer the shares on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution. 

 

			
	Dated                 ,             .		
	 In presence of
  
		
		
	 NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE OF THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND

WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE
 FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY
PARTICULAR, WITHOUT
 ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
#### Leonard Farmer *v.*Calvin Howard.

Attorney and Client.

It is not within the legitimate professional duties of an attorney at law, within his employment to defend one charged with a crime, ta persuade witnesses against defendant not to appear against such defendant.

APPEAL PROM HARLAN CIRCUIT COURT.

January 20, 1876.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The appellee by his answer denied that he employed appellant to defend him, and also denied that he did render any legal services in his defense. It may be conceded that the proof preponderates in favor of the alleged employment, but it does not show, outside of the testimony of appellant, that any services were rendered.

Appellant swore that he was present when the defendant was arrested for perjury; that he defended the said Howard; that he got the most important witness against the defendant not to appear against said defendant at the request of the defendant, he knowing from his statements that the proof would show the defendant guilty; that he did not bribe the witness, but got him not to prosecute the case any further.

The services thus rendered were doubtless beneficial to the appellee, but it strikes this court that they do not fall within the legitimate professional duties of an attorney-at-law, who is an officer of *583the courts in which he practices and a quasi officer of the law, and who acts in all things connected with his profession, under an oath that he will faithfully execute to the best of his ability the office of attorney according to law.

*L. Farmer, for appellant. John*Disham, *for appellee.*

Appellant insists in his brief that the court below ought not to have compelled him to answer the questions which brought out the foregoing statements. He was a voluntary witness 'in his own behalf. The matter sought to be proved was germane to the issue on trial. The only ground upon which he could have been excused from answering was that he would be compelled thereby to disclose the fact that he had violated the law, or committed a breach of professional duty. If he considered that he had done either of these things and had declined to answer on that ground, we have no doubt the circuit judge would have excused him.

The verdict of the jury is not palpably against the weight of the evidence, but if it were, as the testimony of the appellant shows, that instead of asking the courts to assist him in obtaining the reward promised for the services he swears he rendered, he should be content to have them let the latter rest where it now is.

The-judgment must be *affirmed.*
Exhibit 32
                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. 1350,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection with the Quarterly Report of AEI Real Estate  Fund
XVIII  Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form  10-Q  for
the  period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on  the  date hereof  (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned, Robert P. Johnson, President of AEI Fund  Management
XVIII, Inc., the Managing General Partner of the Partnership, and
Patrick  W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer of AEI Fund Management
XVIII,  Inc.,  each  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 Partnership.


                          /s/ ROBERT P JOHNSON
                              Robert P. Johnson, President
                              AEI Fund Management XVIII, Inc.
                              Managing General Partner
                              August 11, 2009



                          /s/ PATRICK W KEENE
                              Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer
                              AEI Fund Management XVIII, Inc.
                              Managing General Partner
                              August 11, 2009
#### B. Small’s Adm’r, *v. A.*S. Jones, Adm’r.

New Trial — Newly Discovered Evidence.

One about to go into trial is required to make preparation and a diligent effort to discover and produce his evidence, and a new trial on account of newly discovered evidence will be denied where it is not shown that such evidence could have been discovered and produced at the trial by proper diligence.

*853APPEAL FROM McCRACKEN CIRCUIT COURT.

October 26, 1875.

*J. L. A. King, for appellant. P. D. Yeiser, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

This is a proceeding to obtain a new trial of an action at law. The appellant was an administrator, and was under no disabilities at the time of the judgment, and was the plaintiff in the action. There is no averment in the petition that the judgment was obtained by fraud, and the only ground mentioned in the petition upon which relief could in any state of case be afforded, is that of newly discovered evidence. Secs. 581 and 573 of the Civil Code of Practice. It is, therefore, necessary to inquire into the alleged errors of the court, and the trial of the original action. These errors can be corrected, if at all, in no other way than by an appeal. The only evidence claimed to have been discovered is the receipt for one hundred dollars. The appellant says that after judgment, and after the expiration of the term at which it was rendered, he for the first time, “upon a careful examination of the paper of B. Small, decedent,” found this receipt. Why he did not make a careful examination of these papers, before judgment, is a fact not disclosed. It was certainly his duty to do so. Pie cannot now have a new trial on account of his lack of diligence in this respect.

Judgment *affirmed.*
#### The Green River and Barren River Navigation Co. *v.*Marshall.

APPEAL from the Vanderburg Common Pleas.

*B. Hynes,*for appellant.

*A. Dyer,*for appellee..

Pettit, J.

The transcript in this case is not paged, the lines numbered, nor is there any marginal notes on. it as required by rule nineteen of this court; nor has the assignment of errors any names, appellant or appellee, to, in, or connected with it in any manner, as is required by rule first. For the failure to give the names of the parties in the assignment of errors, the appeal must be dismissed.

The appeal is dismissed, at the costs of the appellant.
Exhibit 10.25
(d)
 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO
TRANSITION AND SUCCESSION AGREEMENT
     1.
    
    The following sentence is hereby added to the end of Section 3(a) of the Agreement:
  2.
    
    In the first sentence of Section 3(a)(ii) of the Agreement, the phrase In addition, for the
remainder of the calendar year in which the Executive ceases to be employed by the Company and
the Affiliated Companies, and during the two succeeding calendar years, is hereby deleted in
its entirety and replaced with the following phrase:
  3.
    
    The last sentence (set forth below) of Section 3(a)(ii) of the Plan is hereby deleted in its
entirety.




---



##### 



4.
    
    The following shall be added as a new Section 9(f):
 Conditions to Payment and Acceleration; Section 409A of the Code provided however
 5.
    
    This Amendment shall be governed by, interpreted under and construed in accordance with the
laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
 6.
    
    Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement is hereby confirmed in all respects.
  2




---



##### 



MYLAN INC./s/ Rodney L. PiattBy: Rodney L. PiattTitle: Chairman, Compensation Committee/s/ Robert J. CouryRobert J. Coury
 3