alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 301.104 Medical attention.

Whenever an inmate worker is injured while in the performance of assigned duty, regardless of the extent of the injury, the inmate shall immediately report the injury to his official work detail supervisor. In the case of injuries on work details for other federal entities, the inmate shall also report the injury as soon as possible to community corrections or institution staff, as appropriate. The work detail supervisor shall immediately secure such first aid, medical, or hospital treatment as may be necessary for the proper treatment of the injured inmate. First aid treatment may be provided by any knowledgeable individual. Medical, surgical, and hospital care shall be rendered under the direction of institution medical staff for all inmates based at Bureau of Prisons institutions. In the case of inmates based at community corrections centers, medical care shall be arranged by the work supervisor or by community corrections center staff in accordance with the medical needs of the inmate. Refusal by an inmate worker to accept such medical, surgical, hospital, or first aid treatment recommended by medical staff or by other medical professionals may result in denial of any claim for compensation for any impairment resulting from the injury.

[59 FR 2667, Jan. 18, 1994]
#### Cynthia Chiles, as Administratrix of the Estate of Carlton Simpson, Deceased, Appellant, v D & J Service, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Morningside House Nursing Home Company, Inc., et al., Respondents.

[825 NYS2d 21]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered March 3, 2006, which, to the extent appealable by plaintiff, granted the motion of defendants Morningside House Nursing Home Company, Inc. and Aging In America, Inc. (collectively Morningside) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs decedent suffered from Alzheimer’s disease and was a patient at Morningside’s adult day care facility. Morning-side’s patients were transported to and from their homes by D & J Service, Inc. (DJS) pursuant to a contract between Morningside and DJS. Although the contract specifically provided that DJS’s drivers should never leave Morningside’s patients unattended, on the day of the incident, DJS’s driver escorted another patient to her residence and left plaintiffs decedent alone on the DJS van for several minutes. When the driver returned, plaintiffs decedent had wandered off and was found three days later suffering from hypothermia, from which he later died.

The court properly granted summary judgment to Morning-side and dismissed the complaint as against it, since the negligence of DJS and its driver in violating DJS’s own procedures and leaving plaintiffs decedent unattended was the *320sole proximate cause of the incident. Plaintiff raises the issue of vicarious liability for the first time on appeal. Even were we to consider it, there are no triable issues regarding whether Morningside could be held vicariously liable for the negligence of its independent contractor. Morningside did not exercise control over DJS’s performance of its services and rendering the transportation services at issue was not inherently dangerous work *(see Chainani v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y.,*87 NY2d 370, 380-381 [1995]; *Brown v Transcare N.Y., Inc.,*27 AD3d 350, 351 [2006]). Nor did Morningside breach a nondelegable duty to provide transportation to its patients. We note in this connection the Department of Health’s findings, following an investigation of the incident, that there was insufficient evidence that Morningside violated any state or federal regulations.

While plaintiff purports to appeal from that part of the motion court’s order granting Morningside’s motion for summary judgment on its cross claims for contractual and common-law indemnification against DJS, plaintiff is not aggrieved by that part of the order and, accordingly, has no appeal therefrom (CPLR 5511; *see D’Ambrosio v City of New York,*55 NY2d 454, 459-460 [1982]; *Baca v HRH Constr. Corp.,*200 AD2d 538 [1994], *lv denied*84 NY2d 807 [1994]). Concur—Buckley, PJ., Mazzarelli, Nardelli, Catterson and Malone, JJ.
Exhibit 13.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OR EQUIVALENT

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with Annual Report of Hitachi, Ltd. on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2007 as amended by Amendments No. 1 and No. 2 thereto (the Report) pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) for the purpose of
complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Exchange Act and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.



Toyoaki Nakamura, Senior Vice President and Executive Officer of Hitachi, Ltd., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                        |  |     |  |                                                             
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:    April 28, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Toyoaki Nakamura                                        
|                        |  |     |  | Name:         Toyoaki Nakamura                              
|                        |  |     |  | Title:           Senior Vice President and Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRATED FROM THE UNAUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 THAT WERE FILED WITH
THE COMPANY'S REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                         (1)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     1
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (1)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (1)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

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


         In  connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Spring Valley  Management
Corp.,  on Form  10-QSB for the period  ending  June 30,  2003 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "REPORT"),  the
undersigned, B. Stephen Bailey, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

         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.


Date: April 19, 2004

/s/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting 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
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Texas South Energy, Inc. 10-Q


 


Exhibit 10.1


 





AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This second amendment (the
“Amendment”) amends the employment agreement dated as of September 27, 2013, which employment agreement was amended
on March 17, 2014 (collectively, the original employment and amendment are referred to as “Employment Agreement”),
by and between Texas South Energy, Inc., f/k/a Inka Productions, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and James
M. Askew (“Employee”) and is effective the 30th day of September, 2015.


 


WHEREAS, the Company
and Employee desire to amend the Employment Agreement to extend the term for one additional year and to provide for a severance
payment to Employee in the event of a termination of the Employment Agreement;


 


NOW, THEREFORE,
in consideration of the above, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,
the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


1.            Amendment of Section 2. Section 2 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as
follows:


 


   Term of Employment.
Subject to the provisions for earlier termination provided in this Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective
Date and shall terminate on September 30, 2018 (the “Term”).


 


2.           
No Other Amendments. Except as set forth in Section 1, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect
as currently in effect.


 


3.           
Severability. Should any one or more of the provisions of this Amendment be determined to be illegal or unenforceable,
all other provisions of this Amendment shall be given effect separately from the provision or provisions determined to be illegal
or unenforceable and shall not be effected thereby.


 


4.           
Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts with the same effect as if all parties had
signed the same document. All such counterparts shall be deemed an original, shall be construed together and shall constitute one
and the same instrument.


 


5.           
Entire Agreement. This Amendment and the Employment Agreement constitute the full and entire understanding and agreement
between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.


 


6.           
Defined Terms. Defined terms used in this Amendment shall have the meaning ascribed to them herein or in the Employment
Agreement.


 




    1


     

    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
each of the parties hereto has executed this Amendment or has caused this Amendment to be executed on its behalf by a representative
duly authorized, all as of the date first above set forth.


 






	 	Texas South Energy, Inc.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 By:	
	 	 	James M. Askew, Chief Executive
Officer
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	Employee
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	James M. Askew



 










 



    2
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

1Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et

seq. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

 

No. 97-30093

(Summary Calendar)

 

STACY BATISTE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CONN APPLIANCES, INC., 

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Louisiana

(95-CV-2226)

 

October 24, 1997

Before Wiener, Barksdale, and Emilio M. Garza, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

In this employment discrimination case filed pursuant to Title

VII,1 Plaintiff-Appellant Stacy Batiste contests the district

court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee
2To establish a prima facie case in a typical disparate

treatment discharge case, the plaintiff must show that: (1) he is

a member of a protected group; (2) he was qualified for the job

formerly held; (3) he was discharged; and (4) after his discharge,

the position that he held was filled by someone not within his

protected class. Singh v. Shoney’s Inc., 64 F.3d 217, 219 (5th

Cir. 1995); Vaughn v. Edel, 918 F.2d 517, 521 (5th Cir. 1990). We

note in passing that in this individual employment action

conclusionally alleging disparate treatment but not advancing a

theory of hostile work environment or termination in connection

with a reduction in force, the absence of allegations or evidence

that Batiste’s position was filled by someone who is not a member

of the protected class was likely fatal to establishing a prima

facie case. 

2

Conn Appliances, Inc., finding that no reasonable juror could

conclude that Batiste was fired because of his race. Even

accepting the district court’s generous arguendo assumption that

Batiste established a prima facie case,2 our review of the record

and briefs of the parties satisfies us that the ruling of the

district court in granting Conn’s motion for summary judgment of

dismissal was correct. In our de novo review we find that no

genuine issues of material fact exist. Accordingly, the district

court’s summary judgment is 

AFFIRMED.
### §459i–1. Acquisition of lands; authority of Secretary; mainland lands for access to seashore administrative and visitor facilities; State lands; transfer from Federal agency to administrative jurisdiction of Secretary

Within the boundaries of the seashore, the Secretary may acquire lands, waters, and interests therein by purchase, donation, transfer from any Federal agency, or exchange. The Secretary may also acquire not to exceed one hundred acres of lands or interests in lands on the mainland to provide access to the administrative and visitor facilities for the seashore. Any lands or interests therein owned by the State of Georgia, or any political subdivision thereof may be acquired only by donation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any Federal property located within the boundaries of the seashore may, with the concurrence of the agency having custody thereof, be transferred without transfer of funds to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for the purposes of the seashore.

(Pub. L. 92–536, §2, Oct. 23, 1972, 86 Stat. 1066.)
#### § 2.69 [Reserved]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Todd G. Dean, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 713]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Kenneth R. Fisher, J.), entered December 3, 2004. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly determined that de*1256fendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 *et seq.).*The court’s findings with respect to each risk factor and the court’s ultimate determination of defendant’s overall risk level are supported by the requisite clear and convincing evidence, including reliable hearsay (see § 168-n [3]; *People v Jordan,*31 AD3d 1196 [2006]; *People v Hegazy,*25 AD3d 675 [2006]; *People v Brown,*7 AD3d 831, 832 [2004]). Present—Kehoe, J.P., Martoche, Centra, Green and Pine, JJ.
#### Rome Brick Company *v.*West *et al.,*executors.

February 18, 1910.

Foreclosure of lieu. Before Judge Wright. Floyd superior court.

October 12, 1908.

*John*W. *& G. E. Maddox,*for plaintiff.

*M. B. Eubanks*and *Dean & Dean,*for defendants.

Atkinson, J.

1. In so far as it was sought to foreclose a lien this case is controlled by the ruling in *Pike Brothers Lumber Co.*v. *Mitchell,*132 *Ga.*675 (64 S. E. 998), where it was held: “In order to foreclose a materialman’s lien for material furnished a contractor to be used' in improving the property of another, it is necessary that the materialman have judgment against the contractor in a previous action, or the contractor must be sued concurrently in the foreclosure proceedings with the owner of the property improved. If the contractor be adjudged a bankrupt, so that no judgment in personam can be had against him in an action at law, his immunity from liability to a personal judgment will not give the materialman a right to foreclose his lien in equity against the property improved.”

2. The prayer to recover a general judgment against the estate of the deceased landowner was stricken from the petition by amendment.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
### §430h–13. Authorization of appropriations

There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out sections 430h–10 to 430h–13 of this title.

(Pub. L. 107–238, §5, Oct. 11, 2002, 116 Stat. 1487.)
Mi Familia

• Protege a tu familia contra la gripe 

(influenza) al vacunarte.

• Se recomienda que todas las personas, 

a partir de los 6 meses, se vacunen 

contra la gripe.

• La vacuna contra la gripe te protege 

contra esta enfermedad durante toda

la temporada.

Para más información en español visite:

http://www.cdc.gov/flu
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

# DATE AND TIME:

Wednesday, January 19, 2011, 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time.

# PLACE:

Commission Meeting Room on the First Floor of the EEOC Office Building, 131 “M” Street, NE., Washington, DC 20507.

# STATUS:

The meeting will be open to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 

## Open Session

1. Announcement of Notation Votes, and

2. Human Trafficking and Forced Labor—Invited Panelists

# Note:

                        In accordance with the Sunshine Act, the meeting will be open to public observation of the Commission's deliberations and voting. Seating is limited and it is suggested that visitors arrive 30 minutes before the meeting in order to be processed through security and escorted to the meeting room. (In addition to publishing notices on EEOC Commission meetings in the                         **Federal Register**                        , the Commission also provides information about Commission meetings on its Web site,                         *eeoc.gov.,*                         and provides a recorded announcement a week in advance on future Commission sessions.)                    

                    Please telephone (202) 663-7100 (voice) and (202) 663-4074 (TTY) at any time for information on these meetings. The EEOC provides sign language interpretation and Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) services at Commission meetings for the hearing impaired. Requests for other reasonable accommodations may be made by using the voice and TTY numbers listed above.                     **CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION**                    : Stephen Llewellyn, Executive Officer on (202) 663-4070.                

Dated: This Notice Issued January 10, 2011.

Stephen Llewellyn,

Executive Officer, Executive Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 2011-655 Filed 1-10-11; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6570-01-P