alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

#### Burroughs Corp. v. Overnite Transportation Co.

February 10, 1976

Case No. 7988

By JUDGE RICHARD L. WILLIAMS

This nutter is before the court on plaintiff's motion to reconsider an adverse judgment entered against it on December 17, 1975, that was vacated by an order entered on January 6, 1976. After further consideration of the evidence, oral argument, supplemental memoranda, and applicable authorities, I have concluded that my original decision was wrong and that judgment should be entered for the plaintiff in the amount of $7,119.01. Plaintiff's request for attorney's fees is denied.

The pivotal question is whether plaintiff complied with i 2(b) of the Uniform Straight Bill of Lading (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 11), which reads in part:

> As a condition precedent to recovery, claims must be filed in writing with the receiving or delivering carrier, or carrier issuing this bill of lading, or carrier on whose line the Ion, damage, injury or delay occurred, or carrier in possession of the property when the loss, damage, injury or delay occurred, within nine months after delivery of the property. . . .

*518Germane evidence relating to this issue begins with defendant’s driver’s acknowledgment of damage on July 6, 1973, the date of his delivery, by his signature on the shipping order (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1) on the face of which some identification of the damaged items is listed. This was followed by a formal undated notice of claim by plaintiff’s administrative manager (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5). This notice in writing had to be received by defendant before July 25, 1973, as it was acknowledged by defendant’s office supervisor on that date (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6). Thereafter, defendant’s representative visited plaintiff’s place of business, viewed the damaged items, identified them by make, number and kind, and reported to the defendant that no costs estimates were then available (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 7), (August 20, 1973). Precise cost detail of plaintiff’s claim was not received by defendant until April 9, 1974, more than nine months after delivery of the damaged goods. But, as I view the evidence and the authorities, particularly *Loveless*v. *Universal Carloading & Dist. Co.,*225 F.2d 637 (10th Cir. 1955), this was a mere detail needed to process a claim that had previously been made in writing sometime in July, 3973, a matter of days after the loss occurred (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5).

Since plaintiff’s proof showed that the goods in Question were delivered to defendant in an undamaged state and received in a damaged state, and the defendant failed to offer any exculpatory evidence on how the damage occurred, liability is not an issue.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0717

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

DARRELL DEAN SHARP,

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 November 22, 2023, within which to prepare, 

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

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 16 2023

10/16/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0717
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice
 On September 21, 2017, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York in the lawsuit entitled 
                    *United States*
                     v. 
                    *Mazza & Sons, Inc.,*
                     Civil Case No. 6:17-cv-01041-GTS-TWD. The proposed settlement resolves the United States' claims under Section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9607, against Mazza & Sons, Inc., for recovery of past response costs incurred at the Frankfort Asbestos Superfund Site. The Site is located at 3720 Southside Road (Old New York State 5S), approximately one mile northwest of the Town of Frankfort, in Herkimer County, New York. Under the proposed Consent Decree, Mazza & Sons, Inc. will pay $250,000 in past response costs to resolve the United States' claims. The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to 
                    *United States of America*
                     v. 
                    *Mazza & Sons, Inc.,*
                     Case No. 6:17-cv-01041-GTS-TWD, D.J. Ref. No. 90-11-3-10738/4. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail: *To submit comments:*
*Send them to:*By email
*pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov*.By mail
Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, D.C. 20044-7611.
 During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site: 
                    *http://www.justice.gov/​enrd/​consent-decrees.*
                     We will provide a paper copy of the Consent Decree upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request for a paper copy and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611. Please enclose a check or money order for $5.75 (25 cents per page reproduction cost), payable to the United States Treasury. Robert E. Maher, Jr., Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.


[FR Doc. 2017-20648 Filed 9-26-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
EXHIBIT
3.1(ii)




CARROLLTON
BANCORP


ARTICLES
OF AMENDMENT




CARROLLTON
BANCORP, a Maryland corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Corporation”),
hereby certifies to the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland
(the “Department”) that:




FIRST:  The
Corporation hereby amends its Charter as currently in effect, consisting of
Articles of Incorporation filed with the Department on January 11, 1990, by
deleting therefrom in its entirety, Article FIFTH and inserting
in lieu thereof the following:




FIFTH:  The
total number of shares of capital stock which the Corporation has authority to
issue is Ten Million (10,000,000) shares of Common Stock, with a par value of
One Dollar ($1.00) per share.  The aggregate par value of all shares
of capital stock is Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00).




SECOND:  These
Articles of Amendment were duly advised by the Board of Directors of the
Corporation and were duly approved by the stockholders of the Corporation, in
accordance with the Charter and Bylaws of the Corporation and applicable
law.




THIRD:  (a)
Immediately before the amendment to the Charter of the Corporation set forth in
these Articles of Amendment, the total number of shares of stock of all classes
which the Corporation had authority to issue was Five Million (5,000,000) shares
of Common Stock, with a par value of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per share, and the
aggregate par value of all shares of capital stock which the Corporation had
authority to issue was Fifty Million Dollars ($50,000,000.00).









(b)  After
giving effect to the amendment to the Charter of the Corporation set forth in
these Articles of Amendment, the par value of the issued and unissued Common
Stock of the Corporation is reduced from Ten Dollars ($10.00) per share to One
Dollar ($1.00) per share, the total number of shares of stock of all classes
which the Corporation has authority to issue is Ten Million (10,000,000) shares
of Common Stock, with a par value of One Dollars ($1.00) per share, and the
aggregate par value of all shares of capital stock which the Corporation has
authority to issue is Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00).




IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused these Articles of Amendment to be
signed in its name and on its behalf by its President and attested to by its
Secretary as of this 11th day of May, 1999, and its President acknowledges that
these Articles of Amendment are the corporate act and deed of the Corporation
and, as to all matters and facts required to be verified under oath,
acknowledges that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief
these  matters and facts are true in all material respects and that
this statement is made under penalties of perjury.




ATTEST:
              CARROLLTON
    BANCORP/s/
      D. Doreen Smith
              By: /s/
      Dallas R. ArthurD. Doreen
      Smith
              Dallas R.
      ArthurSecretary
              President
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11



                                 LEAPNET, INC.


             STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER-SHARE EARNINGS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              Three Months Ended October 31,         Nine Months Ended October 31,
                                              ------------------------------         -----------------------------
                                                  1999              1998                  1999            1998
                                                  ----              ----                  ----            ----
   <S>                                       <C>                <C>                   <C>             <C>
   Net income                                $   600,215        $(16,594,611)         $   964,855     $(16,505,731)

   Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding during period        14,154,229          13,648,866           14,145,772       13,646,199

   Net shares issuable upon exercise of
      dilutive outstanding stock options         692,689                   0              692,689                0
                                             -----------        ------------          -----------     ------------

   Shares used in Diluted per share
       calculation                            14,846,918          13,648,866           14,838,461       13,646,199

   Basic earnings per common share           $      0.04        $      (1.22)         $      0.07     $      (1.21)

   Diluted earnings per common share         $      0.04        $      (1.22)         $      0.07     $      (1.21)
</TABLE>

                                      26
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Federal Housing Finance Board]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARDLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpires**OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS**Washington, DCSpecial Assistant to the ChairmanMindy W. TurbovOTSC15..................Washington, DCChairmanBruce A. MorrisonEXPASIII7 years02/28/1999Washington, DCBoard DirectorLawrence U. CostiglioEXPASIV7 years02/28/1995Washington, DCBoard DirectorTimothy J. O'NeillEXPASIV7 years02/28/1997Washington, DCBoard Director VacantEXPASIV..................Washington, DCBoard Director (Ex-Officio) - Secretary of HUDHenry CisnerosEXPASII..................Washington, DCSpecial AssistantKaren H. CrosbyOTSC15..................
```
`[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 Edition
      BRANCH: EXECUTIVE 
       OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION`

|Location       | Position Title                    | Name of Incumbent        | Pay Plan | Type of Appt. | Level Grade or Pay | Tenure     | Expires   
|-------------- | --------------------------------- | ------------------------ | -------- | ------------- | ------------------ | ---------- | ----------
|Washington, DC | Chairman                          | Stuart E. Weisberg       | EX       | PAS           | III                | 6 years    | 04/27/1999
|Washington, DC | Legal Counsel and Special Advisor | Deborah A. Katz          | ES       | NA            | ..........         | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | Special Assistant to the Chairman | Jeanne Hollingsworth     | GS       | SC            | 12                 | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | Commissioner                      | Velma K. Montoya         | EX       | PAS           | IV                 | 6 years    | 04/27/1997
|Washington, DC | Counsel to a Commissioner         | William W. Matchneer III | GS       | SC            | 15                 | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | Confidential Assistant            | Delma L. Alegria         | GS       | SC            | 10                 | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | Commissioner                      | Daniel J. Guttman        | EX       | PAS           | IV                 | 6 years    | 04/27/2001
|Washington, DC | Confidential Assistant            | Brenda A. Scott          | GS       | SC            | 10                 | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | Executive Director                | William J. Gainer        | ES       | NA            | ..........         | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | General Counsel                   | Earl H. Ohman, Jr.       | ES       | CA            | ..........         | .......... | ........  
|Washington, DC | Counsel to a Commissioner         | Lynn S. McIntosh         | GS       | SC            | 15                 | .......... | ........
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3213 

To amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to provide additional exemptions 

from the internal control auditing requirements for smaller and newer 

public companies. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 14, 2011 

Mr. FINCHER (for himself, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. 

DOLD, Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan, Mr. QUAYLE, Mr. WESTMORELAND, 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. STIVERS, Mr. RIGELL, Mr. DESJARLAIS, Mr. 

MCHENRY, and Mr. LUETKEMEYER) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to provide additional exemptions from the internal control auditing requirements for smaller and newer public companies. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Company Job 

5 Growth and Regulatory Relief Act of 2011’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3213 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM AUDIT REQUIREMENT FOR 

2 SMALLER ISSUERS. 

3 Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 is 

4 amended by striking subsection (c) and inserting the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘(c) EXEMPTION FOR SMALLER ISSUERS.—Sub7 section (b) shall not apply with respect to any report re8 quired under subsection (a) of an issuer that has a total 

9 public float for the relevant reporting period of less than 

10 $350,000,000. 

11 ‘‘(d) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in the ex12 emptions provided for in subsection (c) shall be construed 

13 to relieve or exempt any issuer from the requirements for 

14 internal control reporting and assessment under sub15 section (a) or the requirement that officers of the issuer 

16 certify each annual and quarterly report pursuant to sec17 tion 302.’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3128 

To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 

Act to adjust the date on which consolidated assets are determined 

for purposes of exempting certain instruments of smaller institutions 

from capital deductions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 6, 2011 

Mr. GRIMM (for himself, Mrs. MALONEY, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. MEEKS, 

Ms. HAYWORTH, and Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to adjust the date on which consolidated assets are determined for purposes of exempting 

certain instruments of smaller institutions from capital 

deductions. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DATE FOR DETERMINING CONSOLIDATED AS4 SETS. 

5 Section 171(b)(4)(C) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

6 Reform and Consumer Protection Act is amended by inVerDate Mar 15 2010 22:36 Oct 11, 2011 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3128.IH H3128

emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3128 IH

1 serting after ‘‘December 31, 2009,’’ the following: ‘‘or 

2 March 31, 2010,’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

**PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) ORRULE 15d-14(b)**

**OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Gardenburger, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K forthe year ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott C. Wallace,Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, RobertT. Trebing, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Scott C.  Wallace                                         |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Scott C. Wallace                                              |
| Chairman of the  Board, President and Chief Executive Officer |
| Gardenburger, Inc.                                       |
| December 16,  2005                                       |
|                                                          |
| /s/ Robert T.  Trebing, Jr.                              |   |
| Robert T.  Trebing, Jr.                                  |
| Chief Financial  Officer                                      |
| Gardenburger, Inc.                                       |
| December 16,  2005                                       |
|                                                               |        |  |

 

This certification ismade solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for anyother purpose.  A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided toGardenburger, Inc. and will be retained by Gardenburger, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

 No. 08-1180 

MARY S. REID,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal

Service Agency,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Martin K. Reidinger,

District Judge. (3:06-cv-00267-MR-DCK)

Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 29, 2008

Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mary S. Reid, Appellant Pro Se. Sidney P. Alexander, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Mary S. Reid seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing her employment discrimination action with prejudice. We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of

appeal was not timely filed. 

When the United States or its officer or agency is a

party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days

after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order,

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal

period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is

“mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr.,

434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361

U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). 

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

November 9, 2007. The notice of appeal was filed on January 31,

2008. Because Reid failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to

obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32



                                  CERTIFICATION


By signing below, each of the undersigned officers hereby certifies pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to his or her knowledge, (i) this report fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and (ii) the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of River
Valley Bancorp.

Signed this 14th day of November, 2003.



By: /s/ Larry C. Fouse                 By: /s/ Matthew P. Forrester
    ----------------------------           -------------------------------
    Larry C. Fouse                         Matthew P. Forrester
    Vice President of Finance              President and 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 River Valley  Bancorp and will be
retained by River Valley  Bancorp and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.