alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### John SLAVICS and Jean M. Slavics, husband and wife v. Terry WOOD and Donald Wood, Sr.

Civ. A. No. 32675.

United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.

Oct 6, 1964.

Albert C. GekosM, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.

Paul J. Senesky, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendants.

WOOD, District Judge.

In this personal injury action, husband and wife as co-parties brought suit on their *separate*causes of action against the defendants. The defendants answered and also filed what they termed a “counterclaim” for contribution against the husband should liability be found against the defendants regarding the wife’s claim. The plaintiffs have moved to dismiss the “counterclaim” because it is contrary to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Federal Rule 13(a) obligates the defendant to assert any counterclaim *which at the time of serving the pleading,*he has against the plaintiff which arises out of the occurrence sued upon. The requirement of this rule, is that the claim *must be matured*in order to qualify as a counterclaim. A claim for contribution can only arise after trial and judgment against the defendants. Rule 13 has no provision which accelerates an unmatured claim, therefore a claim for contribution which,is *contingent*cannot be the subject of a counterclaim.

The proper method of joining a co-party as a third-party defendant under the Federal Rules is to sever the husband plaintiff as is permitted by the broad language of Rule 21 which states: “Any claim against a party may be severed and proceeded with separately.” It is necessary to resort to Rule 21, because Rule 14 only allows a defendant to join as a third-party defendant “ * * *a person not a party to the action*who ■is or may be liable to him for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against him.”

The defendants’ allusion to the Pa.R.C.P. 2252(d), 12 P.S. Appendix, while intriguing is unavailing since 2252(d) does not regulate the practice in this Court.

*48Therefore,' we make the following:

ORDER

And now, this 6th day of October, 1964, the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss is granted with leave also granted to the defendants to sever the plaintiff John Slavics and join him as a third-party defendant in the suit filed by Jean M. Slavics by serving a summons and third-party complaint as provided by Rule 14.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kenneth T. Hyson, Appellant.

[974 NYS2d 852]

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Alex R. Renzi, J.), rendered July 8, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [2] [b]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record establishes that he knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal *(see generally People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]), and that valid waiver forecloses *1388any challenge by defendant to the severity of the sentence *(see id.*at 255; *People v Lococo,*92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; *People v Hidalgo,*91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]). We reject defendant’s further contention that his right to counsel was violated when County Court denied his request for a new attorney without making an inquiry into his reasons for the request. Defendant’s request for a new attorney was wholly lacking in “specific factual allegations of ‘serious complaints about counsel’ ” *(People v Porto,*16 NY3d 93, 100 [2010]). We note in any event that, at the next court date following defendant’s request for a new attorney, which was to be a conditional examination of the elderly victim, defendant accepted a plea offer with sentencing consideration that was more favorable than the prior offer. Indeed, based on the court’s statements at sentencing, it appears that the sentence was considerably more favorable than the sentence that the court would have imposed but for the sentencing parameters agreed to as part of the plea. Present— Fahey, J.E, Peradotto, Lindley, Sconiers and Whalen, JJ.
#### Keith Long, Appellant, v Gap, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[824 NYS2d 919]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered May 12, 2005, as (1) granted the motion of the defendant Gap, Inc., for leave to reargue, and upon reargument, vacated so much of its prior order entered December 30, 2004 as denied that defendant’s prior motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and thereupon, granted the motion for summary judgment, and, (2) upon granting the plaintiffs cross motion for leave to reargue, adhered to so much of its prior order entered December 30, 2004 as denied the plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendants’ motion for leave to reargue *(see Perez v Linshar Realty Corp.,*259 AD2d 532 [1999]; *Long v Long,*251 AD2d 631 [1998]; *Rodney v New York Pyrotechnic Prods. Co.,*112 AD2d 410 [1985]). Upon reargument, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the defendant Gap, Inc., established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment *(see Termine v Continental Baking Co.,*299 AD2d 406 [2002]). In response, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(id.).*

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Goldstein, J.P., Skelos, Lunn and Covello, JJ., concur.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
UNADUTED FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE  
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                    0000318716     
<NAME>                   NUMEX CORPORATION  
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U. S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                   APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                            0
<CASH>                                                38,056
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          1,049
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                           64,234
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     104,532
<PP&E>                                               224,256
<DEPRECIATION>                                       217,278
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       539,196
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              1,777,029
<BONDS>                                            1,165,000
<COMMON>                                             627,060
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                        (3,029,893)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      (2,402,833)
<SALES>                                              932,350
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     932,350
<CGS>                                                512,925
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      1,147,347
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    58,817
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (273,814)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (274,614)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       936,484
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (1,211,098)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (.20)
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2



                           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 Wellstone Filters, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB  for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Samuel
Veasey, Chief Financial  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, to the best of my knowledge:

      (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.



Dated:  April 5, 2006               By /s/ Samuel M. Veasey
				       --------------------
					   Samuel M. Veasey
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                       (Principal Financial Officer)


A signed original of this written statement  required  by  Section  906  of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  has been furnished to Wellstone Filters, Inc. and will  be
retained by Wellstone  Filters,  Inc.  and  furnished  to  the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2108 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2108

 To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent 
Agencies, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Salaries and Expenses for 
                           fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent 
Agencies, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Salaries and Expenses for 
                           fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR INDEPENDENT 
              AGENCIES, CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION, SALARIES 
              AND EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Independent Agencies, 
Consumer Product Safety Commission, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal 
year 2024 may not exceed $127,000,000.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0466

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

vs. 

CHRISTOPHER HORN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including February 14, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 8 2024

01/08/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0466
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             46,598
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      89,477
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  136,075
<PP&E>                                            348,688
<DEPRECIATION>                                    174,877
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    309,886
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              71,697
<BONDS>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                           40,542
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                         1,340
<OTHER-SE>                                        196,307
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      309,886
<SALES>                                            72,026
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   89,074
<CGS>                                              33,948
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      33,948
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  1,201
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (20,079)   
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (20,079)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (20,079)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (   .01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (   .01)
        

</TABLE>
Order entered August 5, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00309-CR

PATRICK DARNELL LAWRENCE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 282nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F08-73515-S

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of New Century Companies, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such
officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 of the Company fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the Form 10-QSB
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|May 20, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/    DAVID
DUQUETTE
|------------ |  |  |  | ---------------------
|             |  |  |  | Name:                
|             |  |  |  | Title:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,917,162
<SECURITIES>                                           820
<RECEIVABLES>                                         4113
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,922,095
<PP&E>                                              36,649
<DEPRECIATION>                                      22,619
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,936,125
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               45,983
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,643,333
<COMMON>                                           399,830
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,936,125
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    47,309
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (47,309)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (37,174)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (37,174)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.09)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1
------------

                   CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 USC SS.1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Composite Technology Corporation
(Company) on Form 10-QSB/A (Report) for the quarter ended March 31, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof. I, Benton
H Wilcoxon, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
knowledge, 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.

/s/ Benton H Wilcoxon
---------------------
Benton H Wilcoxon
Chief Executive Officer

Dated: February 3, 2004
       -----------------

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Composite Technology Corporation
(Company) on Form 10-QSB/A (Report) for the quarter ended March 31, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof. I, Benton
H Wilcoxon, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
knowledge, 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.

/s/ Benton H Wilcoxon
---------------------
Benton H Wilcoxon
Chief Financial Officer

Dated: February 3, 2004
       -----------------
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

ELIZABETH BLEVINS, et al., :

 :

Plaintiffs, :

 :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-00120-CG-B

 : 

SEYDI VAKKAS AKSUT, et al., :

 :

Defendants. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant 

to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and 

Recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion 

of this Court. It is ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand be denied, that 

Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss be granted as to Plaintiffs’ RICO claims, and that 

this Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining 

state-law claims and thus dismisses the claims without prejudice.

DONE and ORDERED this 28th day of March, 2016.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-00120-CG-B Document 134 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

438 

TP 16-02001 

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF AKEEM A. BRENSON, PETITIONER, 

V ORDER

DONALD VENETTOZZI, DIRECTOR, SPECIAL HOUSING, 

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 

COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT. 

 

AKEEM A. BRENSON, PETITIONER PRO SE. 

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (KATHLEEN M. TREASURE

OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial

Department by order of the Supreme Court, Seneca County [Dennis F.

Bender, A.J.], entered October 27, 2016) to review a determination of

respondent. The determination found after a tier III hearing that

petitioner had violated various inmate rules. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously

confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed. 

Entered: April 28, 2017 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court