alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### GRIMM v. LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORPORATION et al.

Civ. No. 835.

District Court, N. D. Texas, Dallas Division.

July 26, 1943.

Henry Klepak, of Dallas, Tex., for the motion.

John A. Erhard, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Dallas, Tex., opposed.

ATWELL, District Judge.

Plaintiff sues for $150,000 for alleged slander and libel. Without any third party proceedings, the United States answered, setting out its interest in the litigation by reason of a contract with the defendant upon a cost-plus fee basis.

The action arises over the contract and betterments, for war purposes, of Love Field, near Dallas, where airplanes and other impedimenta are assembled, used, and constructed.

The plaintiff complains that he would not be able to get the ear of a jury if the jury is permitted to understand that any judgment rendered for him would be paid by the United States. He also complains that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, have not been followed in making the United States a party. Rule 14; or, Rule 24.

The question is hardly an open one. The law gives the United States the right to come into a suit in which it is interested and the chief law officer is granted that authority. Title 5, U.S.C.A. §§ 307-309. See In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564, 15 S.Ct. 900, 39 L.Ed. 1092; Booth v. Fletcher, 69 App. D.C. 351, 101 F.2d 676; McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 47 S.Ct. 319, 71 L.Ed. 580, 50 A.L.R. 1; Ponzi v. Fessenden, 258 U.S. 254, 42 S.Ct. 309, 66 L.Ed. 607, *19922 A.L.R. 100; Mundy v. McDonald, 216 Mich. 444, 185 N.W. 877, 20 A.L.R. 398.

The statute and the decided law under it seem to undermine the suggestion that the ordinary rules of pleading are binding upon the United States, or that a private litigant would be granted something less than his full rights if his adversary is the United States. The latter position does not find a secure lodgement in our court adjudications. Jurors, the judges of the facts, like the judges of the law, are impervious to the reach of parties. It is justice that animates them in their decisions. If a citizen .has a real grievance against his government, and that grievance is susceptible of photographing in dollars and cents, he has no difficulty in securing the ripening of his cause into a judgment. That sort of litigation furnishes the majority of the work in the national courts. To question its efficacy and justice would be to seek to hang an argument upon an unsubstantial.

The motion may be overruled.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                        ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
                             DENARII RESOURCES INC.
            FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2008
                 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Chris Lori, am the Chief Executive Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer
of Denarii Resources Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"). I am delivering
this  certificate in connection with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q/A of the
Company  for the three  month  period  ended  March 31,  2008 and filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission ("Quarterly Report").

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge,
the Quarterly  Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that the  information
contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: August 7, 2008
                                         By: /s/ Chris Lori
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             CHRIS LORI
                                             Chief Executive Officer, President,
                                             acting Chief Financial Officer,
                                             acting Principal Accounting Officer
                                             and Director
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

       CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13A-14(B) OR RULE 15D-14(B) OF THE
                    SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT AND 18 U.S.C.1350

The undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63
of title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his or her capacity as an officer of Lotus
Bancorp, Inc., that, to his or her knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Lotus
Bancorp, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in such reports fairly represents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Lotus
Bancorp, Inc. This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
Exchange Commission as an exhibit to such Form 10-QSB. A signed original of this
statement has been provided to Lotus Bancorp, Inc. and will be retained by Lotus
Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.

Date: September 28, 2006


/s/ Satish B. Jasti
-------------------------------------
Satish B. Jasti
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Richard E. Bauer
-------------------------------------
Richard E. Bauer
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.1

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, William F. Rountree, Jr., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Monarch Financial Holdings, 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly 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 we 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 quarterly 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
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 the equivalent
functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies 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.



|                       |  |                                    
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------------------
|Date: November 8, 2007 |  | /s/ William F. Rountree, Jr.       
|                       |  | William F. Rountree, Jr.           
|                       |  | President & Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
ART. 5 FDS for fiscal year 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  131,335
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,229
<INVENTORY>                                    154,133
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               283,605
<PP&E>                                       1,090,710
<DEPRECIATION>                                 336,230
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,319,225
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,868
<BONDS>                                        394,545
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            34
<OTHER-SE>                                     634,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,319,225
<SALES>                                      1,083,188
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,083,188
<CGS>                                          923,278
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  923,278
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                90,597
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,963
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,160
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 51,190
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,835
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             30,355
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    30,355
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.97
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

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 EGPI Firecreek, Inc. (the Registrant) on
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, John R. Taylor,
President, 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 our
knowledge and belief:

| |                                                                                                                                                                      
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) The
  Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
  the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.

|                       |                          | 
|---------------------- | ------------------------ | 
|Date: April
  14, 2006 | By: /s/ John
  R. Taylor | 
|                       |                          | 
|                       | John R.
  Taylor         | 
|                       | President                | 

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 Registrant and will be retained by the
Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.

*****

---
#### ROZANSKI v. MIDLAND S. S. LINE.

No. 3495.

United States District Court N. D. Ohio, E. D.

Jan. 30, 1950.

Wm. L. Standard, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff.

Russell V. Bleecker, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant.

JONES, Chief Judge.

This is an action in admiralty for damages for personal injury.

Respondent has requested the Court to order libelant to furnish respondent with names and addresses of the witnesses to the accident, or the names and addresses of persons making statements concerning the accident. Respondent served no interrogatories on libelant prior to the motion which asked for the same information now requested.

The same issue was decided in Bjorlin v. United Steamship Co., D.C., 10 F.R.D. 42. The only difference is that in this case the admiralty rules would seem to apply. However, there is no authority in Admiralty Rule 31, 28 U.S.C.A., concerning the use of interrogatories which gives this Court the power to make the order desired. The only orders concerning interrogatories that can be made are those compelling answer to interrogatories pursuant to the terms of Rule 32C(a). The service of interrogatories is a condition precedent to the Court’s authority under 32C(a), and since respondent has served no interrogatories on libelant, the Court has no authority to order the disclosure of the desired information.

The motion will be overruled.
Case 2:11-cv-02312-SDW-MCA Document 43 Filed 04/18/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 350
Case 2:11-cv-02312-SDW-MCA Document 43 Filed 04/18/11 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 351
Case 2:11-cv-02312-SDW-MCA Document 43 Filed 04/18/11 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 352
Case 2:11-cv-02312-SDW-MCA Document 43 Filed 04/18/11 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 353
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of Atlantis BusinessDevelopment Corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the year endingDecember 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the"Report"), I, Tim DeHerrera, President of the Company, certify, pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 135)), that tomy knowledge:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all        material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of        the Company.

 

***/s/ Tim DeHerrera***

Tim DeHerrera

President

 

 

----

 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of Atlantis Business DevelopmentCorporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31,2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I,Chris Dubeau, CEO of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 135)), that to my knowledge:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all        material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of        the Company.

 

***/s/ Chris Dubeau***

Chris Dubeau, CEO
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. David FELTON, Defendant, *66Christopher Davidson, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-4196-cr.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Oct. 17, 2012.

Darrell B. Fields, New York, NY, for Appellant.

Una A. Dean, Jo Ann M. Navickas, for Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY, for Appellees.

PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge, ROBERTA. KATZMANN, DEBRA A. LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

Christopher Davidson appeals his conviction for weapons possession and obstruction. He argues that the district court erred in refusing to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop and in declining to give a particular jury instruction concerning obstruction. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review.

Davidson was a passenger in a car stopped by the police on the ground that its left brake light was defective. The district court found that the car was not in compliance with § 376 of New York’s Vehicle and Traffic Law (VTL), which requires a vehicle to have “signaling devices and reflectors of a type approved by the Commissioner which are in good working condition.” N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 876(1) (McKinney 2006). Davidson does not challenge the district court’s finding that his left brake light was defective: one of the paired bulbs in the left taillight assembly was out. Instead, he asserts that another statute, § 375(40)(b), specifically governs “stop lamps” and that therefore the court should have applied § 375 instead. But these statutes are not in tension; they complement one another. As a result, the district court properly concluded that under VTL § 376 the officers had a “reasonable suspicion” to stop the vehicle in which Davidson was a passenger. *United States v. Scopo,*19 F.3d 777, 781 (2d Cir.1994).

Davidson also argues that the district court erred in failing to grant his requested instruction as to all three obstruction counts that “the government *67must prove that the defendant foresaw the possibility that Mr. Felton’s lie would make its way to a *federal*proceeding.” A 347 (emphasis added). This is an inaccurate statement of the law. Section 1512 expressly provides that “no state of mind need be proved with respect to the circumstance ... that the official proceeding ... is before a judge or court of the United States....” 18 U.S.C. § 1512(g)(1). The district court committed no error by refusing this charge, and Davidson’s convictions therefore must stand. *See United States v. Desinor,*525 F.3d 193, 198 (2d Cir.2008) (“A conviction will not be reversed ... unless the requested instruction was legally correct[.]”).

Finding no merit in Davidson’s remaining arguments, we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5052

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

222 West 8th Street in Durango, Colorado, as the ‘‘Ben Nighthorse 

Campbell Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 9, 2004

Mr. MCINNIS (for himself, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr. TANCREDO, Ms. DEGETTE, Mrs. 

MUSGRAVE, Mr. UDALL of Colorado, and Mr. BEAUPREZ) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform 

A BILL

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 222 West 8th Street in Durango, Colorado, 

as the ‘‘Ben Nighthorse Campbell Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 222 West 8th Street in Durango, 

7 Colorado, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ben 

8 Nighthorse Campbell Post Office Building’’. 
2

•HR 5052 IH 

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the Ben Nighthorse Camp5 bell Post Office Building.

Æ
***Exhibit 32.1*****Section 1350 Certification**The undersigned hereby certify that, to their knowledge, **(i)**the Form 10-Q filed byYadkin Valley Financial Corporation (the “Issuer”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2007,fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, and **(ii)**the information contained in that report fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theIssuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.         **Yadkin Valley Financial Corporation**         Date: May 14, 2007 By: /s/ William A. Long           William A. Long    President and Chief Executive Officer           By: /s/ Edwin E. Laws           Edwin E. Laws    Chief Financial Officer  Yadkin Valley Financial Corporation
Exhibit
32.1




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 Quarterly Report of Grace 1, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form
10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Virginia K. Sourlis,
Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of the
Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:




(1) the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.




Dated:  March
18, 2009





Grace
      1, Inc.By:
              /s/ VIRGINIA K. SOURLISVirginia
      K. SourlisPresident(Principal
      Executive Officer)(Principal
      Financial Officer)
<PAGE>

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


         As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation of our reports included (or incorporated by reference) in this
Form 10-K into the Company's previously filed Registration Statements (File
Nos. 33-16539, 33-37173, 33-43155, 33-85270, 33-94438, 333-00855, 333-11385,
333-11387, 333-11389, 333-25953, 333-48533, 333-48535, 333-46867, 333-62673,
333-45053, 333-66857, 333-73007, 333-76233, 333-80281 and 333-85135) on
Form S-8.

                                                         /s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


San Jose, California
June 28, 2000


                                                                         PAGE 27
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5039

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2004

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Government Affairs 

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at United States Route 1 in Ridgeway, North 

Carolina, as the ‘‘Eva Holtzman Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 5039 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at United States Route 1 in Ridgeway, North Caro4 lina, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Eva Holtzman 

5 Post Office’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Eva Holtzman Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 22, 

2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.