Xxxx vs. Xxxxxxxx
a) acquaintance with kinds of colour experiences by having and remembering them,
b) knowing what colour experiences other subjects have at a given time. After her release, Xxxxxxxx acquires a particular kind of phenomenal belief that the sky appears blue to normally sighted people and not red, which involves the application of the relevant phenomenal concept, correcting her former mistake. This leads to two conclusions. First, Xxxxxxxx’s knowledge that the sky looks blue phenomenally does not consist in her knowing that it looks blue nonphenomenally plus certain cognitive abilities (Xxxx-Xxxxxxx 1998: 70). Before Xxxxxxxx realises that she is mistaken with regard to how the sky appears to normally sighted observers, she is still able to imagine blue at will, recognise it, and so on (Nida-Rümelin 1998: 70). That is, she can already think about the experience of blue, she has a phenomenal concept of blue, even if she incorrectly applies it. In order to correct her mistake, she does not need to acquire a further ability, but to acquire the corresponding phenomenal belief that the sky appears phenomenally blue (Nida-Rümelin 1998: 70). This refutes the ability hypothesis since it shows that abilities are insufficient to explain Xxxxxxxx’s epistemic progress. Second, Xxxx-Xxxxxxx’s thought experiment counters Xxxxxxx’x conclusion that there are non-physical properties that we can grasp propositionally. According to her, one can accept the epistemic state view of phenomenal belief and knowledge according to which “we can find some ‘content-identical’ item of nonphenomenal knowledge for every item of phenomenal knowledge”, thus rejecting the idea that gaining phenomenal knowledge necessarily involves acquisition of new facts (Xxxx-Xxxxxxx 1998: 69). If that is the case, the knowledge argument fails to demonstrate that there are non-physical facts.
Xxxx vs. Xxxxxx’x Restaurants, Inc. This is an arbitration involving age and/or workers compensation retaliation. Discovery has commenced.
Xxxx vs. Xxxxxx Roto-Lith Ltd. Vs. X.X. Xxxxxxxx & Co. Xxxxxxx vs. Xxxxx Xxxxx Food Corporation
Xxxx vs. General Manufactured Housing, Inc., Southern Lifestyle Homes, Inc., and Green Tree Financial Corporation Court of Common Plea, Second Judicial Circuit of South Carolina Civil Action File No. 95-CP-02-732 This cause of action is a warranty type claim. This cause of action is being defended by Fox & Verenes of Aiken, South Carolina. This cause of action is in the discovery period. THREATENED LITIGATION
Xxxx vs. Xxxxx & Xxxx Mfg. Co., Michigan Department of Civil Rights, Case No. 117813-EM20, relates to a claim of discrimination on the basis of a disability. Claimant had pursued and received a workers' compensation award for a shoulder pain that turned out to result from a torn rotator cuff. Claimant brought a concurrent claim with the MDCR owing to her belief that she was eligible for a return to work and, also, that she could be accommodated. Her initial claim was denied by MDCR and she has petitioned for a redetermination. The Company vigorously contests this claim and perceives no merit in it. Xxxxxx Xxxxx vs. Xxxxx & Xxxx Mfg. Co., Bureau of Workers' Disability Compensation, (Michigan), relates to a claim of work related injury that has been handled on a voluntary basis. The last petition in this matter related to the establishment of a new date of injury. Claimant has affected a return to work under light duty status. The Bureau retains jurisdiction. EXHIBIT D LIST OF EXISTING LIENS ---------------------- Blanket filing by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx, as nominee and agent of the Landlords under the Skokie Lease dated August 20, 1990 EXHIBIT E SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY --------------------------- State in Which Stock of Stock Owned State of Business is Each Class by the Company Incorporation Conducted Outstanding Company ------- ------------- --------- ----------- ------- Xxxxx & Xxxx Michigan Michigan, Common None Manufacturing Co. California 2,919,845 shares Class B Common - 2,402,784 shares Modar, Inc. Michigan Michigan Common - 100% 8,581 shares Xxxxx Michigan Michigan, Common - 100% Manufacturing Co. Indiana 1,000 shares Xxxxx & Xxxx Ontario, Quebec, Common - 100% Canada Inc. Canada Ontario 100,000 shares Preferred - 5,589,565 shares CERTIFICATE OF XXXXX & XXXX MANUFACTURING COMPANY The undersigned, Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxx, President and Chief Executive officer of Xxxxx & Xxxx Manufacturing Company, a Michigan corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies that:
1. Except for the terms of that certain Loan Agreement between the Company and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, dated March 16, 1988, and the terms of that certain Loan Agreement between the Company and Old Kent Bank & Trust Company of even date herewith, the Company is not a party to any other agreement pursuant to which the Company has borrowed funds from a bank or other lending source.
2. The execution, delivery and performance by the Company of the Loan Agreement by and among the Company and Old Kent Ba...
