alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Fabric Fire Hose Co. *v.*Bibb Manuf’g Co.

*(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.*

June 5, 1889.)

Pleading—Answer—Motion to Strike Out.

In an action for the price of corporate stock sold by plaintiff to defendant the defense that plaintiff agreed to deliver stock of a certain kind, which he has not done and cannot do, may be made under a general denial, and a paragraph of the answer setting up those facts will be stricken out.

At Law. On motion to strike out-

*Alfred*Ely, for plaintiff.

*D. M. Porter,*for defendant.

Lacombe, J.

The plaintiff moves to strike out the second paragraph of defendant’s answer to the amended complaint as irrelevant, false, and sham, or that said paragraph be made more definite and certain by stating and alleging therein the date when the special statute referred to in such paragraph was enacted and approved, together with the title to the said act. Upon the hearing an amendment making such paragraph more definite and certain, by inserting such date and title, was ordered, and the answer amended in open court. The plaintiff also moves that the third paragraph of defendant’s said answer be stricken out as irrelevant, hypothetical, and sham. Such paragraph is as follows:

> *“Third.*For a third defense the defendant avers, upon information and belief, that if the contract alleged to have been made between the parties to this action was made by and entered into between them, that it was and is a part of the alleged contract that the plaintiff should deliver to the defendant stock fully paid up and stock upon which this defendant could not in any way be liable except for the wages of employés, and that at the time the alleged contract is alleged to have been entered into the plaintiff was not and has not at any time since been able to deliver any such stock to this defendant, but has made default and has thereby broken its contract. ”

The motion to strike out this paragraph is granted. Upon the argument, defendant’s counsel insisted that without it he could not avail of the defense that the plaintiff had not correctly set forth the alleged contract whose making even was contested by the defendant. There seems to be no ground for any such apprehension. Plaintiff can recover only *secundum, allegata et probata.*It must show' the making of a contract such as it has set forth in the amended complaint, and fulfillment of such contract (or readiness to fulfill) upon its part. If the contract between the parties provided for the delivery of full paid-up stock, that fact will appear when the contract is proved; and if the stock which plaintiff has tendered is not the kind of stock which the contract provided for, such tender will not be a compliance with its terms. Under the general denial, therefore, which puts in issue the making of the contract and its fulfillment by plaintiff, the defendant can avail of the defense set out in the third paragraph, if there be such a defense, quite as well as if the same were expressly pleaded.
EXHIBIT 4(e)

                   AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE SEPTEMBER 19, 1997
                SECURITY AGREEMENT BETWEEN NATIONAL TRANSACTION
                 NETWORK, INC. AND INTERNATIONAL VERIFACT INC.

This  Amendment  No. 1 (the  "Amendment")  to the  parties'  September  19, 1997
Security  Agreement (the "Security  Agreement") is made and entered into between
International  Verifact Inc. and National Transaction  Network,  Inc., as of the
31st day of October, 1997.

WHEREAS,  the parties desire to amend the Security Agreement entered into by and
between the parties in  connection  with the parties'  Convertible  Subordinated
Note Purchase  Agreement  dated August 18, 1997, on the terms and conditions set
forth herein;

NOW,  THEREFORE,  the parties  agree that the  Security  Agreement is amended as
follows:

         1. In the  parenthetical  immediately  following Section F on page 2 of
the Security Agreement the reference to "One Million Dollars ($1,000,000)" shall
be amended by replacing it with "Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000)".

This  Amendment  shall  amend,  modify  and  supersede,  to  the  extent  of any
inconsistency,  the provisions of the Security Agreement.  All provisions of the
Security Agreement not so modified shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  the parties have duly authorized their  representatives  to
make and sign this First Amendment.



NATIONAL TRANSACTION NETWORK, INC.          INTERNATIONAL VERIFACT INC.


BY:   /s/ Milton A. Alpern                  BY:     /s/ Peter H. Henry
   ------------------------------              ---------------------------------
NAME:     Milton A. Alpern                  NAME:    Peter H. Henry
     ----------------------------                -------------------------------
TITLE:    Vice President, Finance           TITLE:   Vice President, Finance
      ---------------------------                 ------------------------------
**EXHIBIT10.2**

SECOND AMENDMENTTO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED RIGHTS AGREEMENT

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TOTHE AMENDED AND RESTATED RIGHTS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into as ofNovember 20, 2006, between International Rectifier Corporation, a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), and Mellon Investor Services LLC (f/k/a ChaseMellon Shareholder Services, L.L.C.) as Rights Agent (“Rights Agent”).

WITNESSETH

WHEREAS, The Company andthe Rights Agent have previously entered in a certain Amended and RestatedRights Agreement, dated as of December 15, 1998 and a certain FirstAmendment to the Amended and Restated Rights Agreement, dated as ofAugust 11, 2006 (as amended, the “Rights Agreement”);

WHEREAS, the RightsAgreement shall expire pursuant to its terms as of November 21, 2006,unless otherwise extended in accordance with its provisions; and

WHEREAS, the Board ofDirectors of the Company has authorized the Company to extend the RightsAgreement until November 21, 2007 pending further review.

                NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1.   The ExpirationDate (as defined in the Rights Agreement) is hereby extended toNovember 21, 2007.

2.   Except as setforth herein, the Rights Agreement remains unmodified and in full force andeffect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theparties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day andyear first above written.
|        |   | INTERNATIONAL RECTIFIER CORPORATION:                                             |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                             |   |   |
|   |   | By:                                                                              |   |   |
|   |   | Title:                                                                           |   | Secretary |
|   |   |                                                                             |   |   |
|   |   | MELLON INVESTOR SERVICES LLC (f/k/a  CHASEMELLON SHAREHOLDER SERVICES,  L.L.C.): |
|   |   |                                                                             |   |   |
|   |   | By:                                                                              |   |   |
|   |   | Title:                                                                           |   | Vice President |

 

1

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT WEST, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Civil Action No. 14-0218-CG-C

)

SAM COCHRAN, SHERIFF OF :

MOBILE COUNTY, ALABAMA,

)

)

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and there having been 

no objections filed, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and dated September 2, 2014, is ADOPTED as the opinion of 

this Court.

DONE and ORDERED this 9th day of March, 2015.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00218-CG-C Document 19 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Provident Financial Group, Inc.'s 10-Q for March 31, 1998 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         203,635
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               261,829
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   605
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,027,452
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      5,071,712
<ALLOWANCE>                                     68,371
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,780,351
<DEPOSITS>                                   4,822,787
<SHORT-TERM>                                   467,657
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            281,838
<LONG-TERM>                                    667,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,000
<COMMON>                                        12,081
<OTHER-SE>                                     521,588
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               6,780,351
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                119,701
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               17,369
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   216
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               137,286
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              51,833
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              73,753
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           63,533
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   11,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               2,223
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 51,022
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 42,055
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      27,307
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,307
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .63
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.04
<LOANS-NON>                                     23,334
<LOANS-PAST>                                    11,848
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   526
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 68,684
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                66,693
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   11,572
<RECOVERIES>                                     2,250
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               68,371
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            68,371
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2
                              CERTIFICATION

I, David T. Nguyen, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of The InterGroup
Corporation;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 quarterly
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 annual report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 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(s) 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 registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing equivalent functions):

    a) all significant deficiencies and material weakness 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 registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: October 17, 2005                        /s/ David T. Nguyen
                                              ---------------------------
                                              David T. Nguyen, Treasurer
                                              and Controller (serving as
                                              Chief Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT 32 (a)

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

         In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Enzo  Biochem,  Inc.,  and
Subsidiaries  ("the  Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended October
31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the  "Report"),  I,  Elazar  Rabbani,  Ph.D.,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the
Company, 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 results of operations of
the Company.





Dated: December 12, 2005                         By: /s/ Elazar Rabbani, Ph.D.
                                                     -------------------------

                                                         Elazar Rabbani, Ph.D.
                                                         Chief Executive Officer




         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other  document  authenticating,   acknowledging,   or  otherwise  adopting  the
signature  that  appears in typed form  within  the  electronic  version 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 Act
Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 10.3 


Electrum Special Acquisition Corporation



 700 Madison Avenue, 5th
Floor


New York, NY 10065


 


_____________, 2015


  


The Electrum Group LLC


 700 Madison Avenue, 5th Floor


New York, NY 10065


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter will confirm our
agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration
statement (the “Registration Statement”) for the initial public offering (the
“IPO”) of the securities of Electrum Special Acquisition Corporation (the
“Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company of an initial
business combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such
earlier date hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Date”), The Electrum Group LLC shall make
available to the Company certain office space and administrative and support services as may be required by the Company from
time to time, situated at 700  Madison Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10065 (or any successor location). In
exchange therefore, the Company shall pay The Electrum Group LLC the sum of $10,000 per month on the Effective Date and
continuing monthly thereafter until the Termination Date. The Electrum Group LLC hereby agrees that it does not have any
right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account (the
“Trust Account”) to be established upon the consummation of the IPO (the
“Claim”) and hereby waives any Claim it may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of,
any negotiations, contracts or agreements with the Company and will not seek recourse against the Trust Account for any
reason whatsoever.


 





	 	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	 	ELECTRUM SPECIAL 
	 	 	ACQUISITION CORPORATION
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 
	 	 	 	Name:
	 	 	 	Title:
	 	 	 	 
	Acknowledged and Accepted by:	 	 
	 	 	 
	THE ELECTRUM GROUP LLC	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:	 	 	 
	 	Name:	 	 
	 	Title:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT L. BLACK and CLARA 

BLACK,

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-0165-CG-C

)

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 

Commissioner of Social Security,

)

)

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and there having 

been no objections filed, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated September 17, 2015, is ADOPTED as the 

opinion of this Court. 

DONE and ORDERED this 15th day of October, 2015.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00165-CG-C Document 20 Filed 10/15/15 Page 1 of 1
#### William Bell, et al., *v.*W. W. Bryant.

Practice — Pleading—Lien of Landlord on Produce, etc.

A petition is bad on demurrer when it fails to aver that the debt is due or that the condition exists which makes it due.

*310Lien of Landlord.

While under the statute the landlord has a lien on the produce of the premises rented under certain conditions, such a lien is lost if such property is removed from such rented premises.

APPEAL PROM SHELBY CIRCUIT COURT.

January 16, 1875.

Opinion by

Judge Peters:

At the time the petition was filed, the debts claimed by appellee were not due, and he prays for a judgment when his debts are due, against “all the defendants, provided the said assignees shall not surrender a sufficient amount of said oats to pay his debts, and all proper relief.”

There was a demurrer to the petition, which was overruled, and a judgment rendered against Bell and Harbison, the assignees for the debt claimed.

Conceding that appellee had an exclusive lien on the oats, the produce of the premises rented, before judgment, could have been rendered in his favor against appellants, he should have amended his petition, and alleged that the rent was then due and unpaid, and as his prayer for a judgment was conditional, that the oats were not surrendered to pay his debt, which he alleged were sufficient for the purpose. He should also have alleged that the oats or a sufficiency thereof had not been surrendered. Consequently the demurrer was improperly overruled, and the judgment must be reversed for that reason. It is deemed proper to express an opinion whether appellee’s lien existed on the oats after they were removed from the premises.

If the lien existed it was by statute. By an amendment to Art 2, Chap. 56, of Rev. Stat., title Landlord and Tenant, approved February 16, 1858, 2 Rev. Stat. 99, it is enacted that Sec. 14, Art. 2, Chap. 56, title Landlord and Tenant, be and the same is repealed, and in lieu thereof it is enacted that a landlord shall have an exclusive lien on the produce of the farm or premises rented, on the fixtures, on the household furniture, and other personal property of the tenant or under tenant, found upon the rented premises, after possession is taken under the lease; but such lien shall not be for more than one year’s rent due or to become due, nor for any rent which has been due for more than four months.

The lien secured by this statute, by its terms, is upon the produce *311of the farm or premises rented, the fixtures, the household furniture and other personal property of the tenant or under-tenant found on the rented premises, etc. If the property described be removed from the rented premises, the landlord’s lien is lost, and his condition is no better than that of other creditors.

*Caldwell & Harwood, for appellants.*

*A. E. Roberts, for appellee.*

The judgment must, therefore, be *reversed*and the cause remanded with directions to sustain appellant’s demurrer to the petition, and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 22

- 00073

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.S.R.

, a Child

From the 166th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020

- PA

- 02528 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE RIOS

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment is AFFIRMED. Costs of appeal are not assessed against appellant because she qualifies as indigent.

SIGNED July 2 0 , 2022.

_____________________________ Irene Rios, Justice