alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Kenneth D., Jr., and Others, Infants. Erie County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Jennifer M., Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 698]

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Patricia A. Maxwell, J.), entered February 10, 2005 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order, inter alia, terminated the parental rights of respondent and committed the guardianship and custody of the children to petitioner.

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

Memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order terminating her parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect. Respondent admitted the allegation of permanent neglect, but she contends that Family Court erred in refusing to issue a suspended judgment and in failing to provide for visitation between respondent and her children. Despite the exemplary efforts of respondent to be reunited with her children by complying with the required service programs, attending counseling, and attending every scheduled visitation and many medical and counseling appointments with the children, we conclude that the court properly determined that respondent is incapable of properly caring for her children, all of whom have special needs, and thus that it is in the best interests of the children to terminate respondent’s parental rights *(see Matter of Trisha K.,*9 AD3d 900, 901 [2004]; *see generally Matter of Star Leslie*W., 63 NY2d 136, 147-148 [1984]). We further conclude that the court properly determined that it lacked authority to provide for visitation between respondent and the children *(see Matter of*Jessi W., 20 AD3d 620, 621-622 [2005]; *Matter of Livingston County Dept. of Social Servs. v Tracy T.,*16 AD3d 1133 [2005]; *see also Matter of Labron P.,*23 AD3d 943, 945 [2005]; *cf. Matter of Corinthian Marie S.,*297 AD2d 382 [2002]). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Green, JJ.
Exhibit 10.37



 



EXHIBIT 10.37


ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



          This Addendum (the “Addendum”) is made effective as of the 12th day of
December, 2003 and is intended to amend a certain Employment Agreement (the
“Agreement”) by and between Erie Indemnity Company and John J. Brinling, Jr.
effective as of December 16, 1997.



          WHEREAS, the Company has determined that it is in the best interest of the
Company and its Shareholders to secure the continued employment of the
Executive in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; and



          WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has previously considered
and agreed to extend the term of the Agreement from its original term; and



          WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company at its meeting of December
9, 2003 has again agreed to extend the term of the Agreement for a period of
one (1) additional year as contained herein; and



          WHEREAS, the Executive is agreeable to the extension of the Agreement.



          NOW, THEREFORE, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as
follows:



          1. Paragraph 1 of the Agreement with respect to the Term is hereby amended
by extending the Term to expire on December 15, 2005.



          2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force
and effect.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ATTEST:	 	      ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	      /s/	 	
Jan R. Van Gorder
	 	By:
	 	/s/
	 	F. William Hirt
	 	 	
Jan R. Van Gorder
	 	 	 	 	 	F. William Hirt
	 	 	
Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 	Chairman of the Board
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	WITNESS:	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	      /s/	 	
Julie Krasinski
	 	 	 	/s/
	 	John J. Brinling, Jr.
	 	 	
Julie Krasinski
	 	 	 	 	 	John J. Brinling, Jr.
	 	 	
Executive Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 	5691 Culpepper Drive
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	Erie, PA 16506



26
Exhibit 3.03

State of Delaware

Certificate of Amendment



|1. | Name of Limited Liability Company: Valero GP, LLC
|-- | -------------------------------------------------



|2. | The Certificate of Formation of the limited liability company is hereby amended as follows: The name of the company is NuStar GP, LLC.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | The Certificate of Amendment is to become effective April 1, 2007.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate on the 21stday of March, A.D. 2007.



|      |  |                                      
|----- |  | -------------------------------------
|By:   |  | /s/ Steven A. Blank                  
|      |  | Authorized Person                    
|Name: |  | Steven A. Blank- SVP, CFO & Treasurer
(No. 39337M.

#### The People of the State of Illinois, Appellant, *vs.*Frank Piatt, Appellee.

*Opinion filed May 23, 1966.*

Rehearing *denied September 21, 1966.*

*73William G. Clark, Attorney General, of Springfield, and John P. O’Rourke, State’s Attorney, of Danville, (Allen L. Dougherty, Assistant State’s Attorney, of counsel,) for the People.

Mr. Justice Underwood

delivered the opinion of the court:

We granted the State’s petition for leave to appeal a Fourth District Appellate Court decision affirming dismissal of an information by the Vermilion County circuit court.

The factual situation is simple. On March 31, 1964,. Frank Piatt was arraigned on an information charging “drag racing”, pleaded not guilty and was released on bond. On the trial date, June 6, prior to examination of the jury, the State’s Attorney sought leave to amend the information to charge reckless driving. Defendant’s objections were sustained and the motion denied. The State thereupon moved to dismiss the information, the motion was allowed and the cause dismissed.

On June 10 a new information was filed charging defendant with reckless driving. It is undisputed that the conduct upon which this charge is based is the same as that upon which the original “drag racing” information was predicated. Defendant’s subsequent motion to dismiss alleged the second information embraced the same acts as the first and was “subterfuge on the part of the plaintiff to circumvent the prior order of court”. This motion was allowed, the cause dismissed and defendant discharged.

There is no need for extended discussion here for the result is controlled by *People*v. *Miller, ante,*p. 62, in which an opinion has been adopted this term holding subsequent *74prosecution on different charges arising from the same conduct is barred under section 3 — 4(b)(1) of the Criminal Code of 1961 only if the former prosecution resulted in a conviction or acquittal. Since the former prosecution in the instant case was dismissed prior to preliminary examination of the jury, the subsequent action of the trial court in dismissing the new information filed on June 10 was clearly erroneous.

The judgment of the appellate court is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to deny the motion to dismiss.

*Reversed and remanded with directions.*
Exhibit 23.1








Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of American Energy Production, Inc. on Form S-8, No. 333-153799, of our report dated May 14, 2010 on the consolidated financial statements of American Energy Production, Inc., as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 and for each of the two years then ended appearing in the annual report on Form 10-K of American Energy Production, Inc for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008.








/s/ SALBERG & COMPANY, P.A.


Boca Raton, Florida


May 14, 2010
### -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

39 40 41 42



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 07/17 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jul 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.44 N 77.04 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ●



## ★ ● ● ● ●
#### § 971.100 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to implement the responsibilities and authorities of the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) pursuant to Public Law 96-283, the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (the Act), to issue to eligible United States citizens permits for the commercial recovery of deep seabed hard minerals.
#### Samuel S. Lowman, Respondent, v. Eva M. Huntley, Appellant, Impleaded with Others.

Judgment of the County Court of Kings county *904affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Rich, J., not voting.
§ 1204.2 Definitions. In addition to the definitions given in section 3 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2052), the following definitions apply for the purposes of this standard. ( a ) *Antenna system* means a device for radiating and/or receiving radio waves. Where they are present, the antenna system includes active elements, ground plane elements, matching networks, element-connecting hardware, mounting hardware, feed cable, and other functional or non-functional elements.
( b ) *Antenna-mast system* means the completed assembly of the antenna system and the mast.
( c ) *Base station* means a transmitter and/or receiver in a fixed location.
( d ) *Citizens Band (CB)* means the frequency band allocated for citizen's band radio service.
( e ) *Current* means the total rate at which electrical charge is transported through the antenna-mast system in response to the applied test voltage, including both capacitive and resistive components.
( f ) *Electrical breakdown* means a failure of the insulating material used with the antenna, such that in the Antenna-Mast System Test of § 1204.4(e) of this subpart, the current flowing through the antenna-mast system is sufficient to actuate the automatic internal cut-off of the high voltage source or exceeds the current that can be measured by the current monitoring device.
( g ) *Feed cable* means the electrical cable that connects the antenna system to the transmitter and/or receiver.
( h ) *Field joint* means any joint between antenna system sections or parts, or between the antenna system and the mast, that is not assembled by the antenna manufacturer.
( i ) *Insulating material and insulation* mean a material that has a very small electric conductivity.
( j ) *Omnidirectional antenna* means an antenna system designed or intended primarily to exhibit approximately equal signal transmission or reception capabilities in all horizontal directions simultaneously.
( k ) *Protection zone* means that portion of an antenna system which can contact the test rod during the Insulating Material Effectiveness Test or can contact the power line during the Antenna-Mast System Test. This zone consists of those elements of the antenna system extending from the uppermost tip of an upright antenna downward to a point that is 12.0 inches (30.5 cm) above the top of the mast when the antenna system is mounted according to the manufacturer's instructions.
( l ) *Voltage, phase to ground,* means that voltage which exists between a single phase of a three phase power system and ground.
#### Bessie Schutzman, as Administratrix of the Estate of Samuel Schutzman, Deceased, Respondent, v. Anna Schutzman, Appellant.

The complaint does not contain allegations of ultimate facts sufficient to sustain the pleaded conclusions as to undue influence, etc. Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

UNITED PARKING, LLC, a Florida limited liability

company, UNITED PARKING GROUP LLC, a Florida

limited liability company, MARCEL PIERRE LE ROUX 

a/k/a/ MARCEL PIERRE LEROUX, an individual, 

and NIKOLAY LALOV, an individual,

Appellants,

v.

RAMIZ KHATIB and DEYAADDIN NATOUR,

on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,

Appellees.

No. 4D2024-0247

[July 11, 2024]

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Keathan B. Frink, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE21006454.

Vincent F. Vaccarella and John A. Moore of Vincent F. Vaccarella, P.A., 

Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

Samara Robbins Bober and Peter J. Bober of Bober & Bober, P.A., 

Hollywood, and Sam J. Smith and Loren B. Donnell of Burr & Smith, LLP, 

St. Petersburg for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350), the undersigned, Alan Woinski, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Gaming Venture Corp., U.S.A., (the "Company"),
does hereby certify, to his knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10QSB for the three months ended June 30,
2004 of the Company (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1034, and
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

Date:       August 11, 2004

By /s/Alan Woinski
   ----------------------
Alan Woinski
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Defense Contracting Regulations A Guide for Small Business, Small and       Disadvantaged Business,      and Women-Owned BusinessPrepared by:   Directorate of Small and Disadvantaged  Business UtilizationOffice of the Secretary of DefenseWashington, D.C. 20301TABLE OF CONTENTS**PREFACE**
**CHAPTER 1.  INTRODUCTION**						HOW THIS GUIDE CAN HELP YOU
							CONTENTS OF THIS GUIDE
**CHAPTER 2.  BACKGROUND INFORMATION**OVERVIEW OF THE REGULATIONS
MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND GOVERNMENT PRACTICES
**CHAPTER 3.  BASIC CONTRACTING PRINCIPLES**
**CHAPTER 4. CONTRACT FORMATION**					CONTRACTING OPPORTUNITIES
		CBD Announcements					Solicitation Mailing Lists										Qualification Lists											Subcontracting Directory										Small Business Innovation Research								Unsolicited Proposals										Promotion of Small Business Contracting							Promotion of Small Disadvantaged Business Contracting
				CONTRACTING PROCEDURES
				Sealed Bids							Procedures	
											Requirements for Award	
									Bid Mistakes	
											Bid Protests	
											Two-Step Sealed Bids	
						 		Competitive Proposals					Procedures	
											Contract Prince and Cost Analysis
						Profit
											Other Than full-and-Open Competition						 		Small Purchases	
**CHAPTER 5.  THE CONTRACT**							CONTRACT TYPES	
		 		Fixed-Price Contracts						Firm-Fixed-Price Contracts
						 			Economic Price Adjustment
						 			Fixed-Price Redetermination Contracts
					 			Fixed-Price Incentives Contracts
					  		Cost-Reimbursement Contracts		 			Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contracts
						 			Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee Contracts
					 			Cost-Plus-Award-Fee Contracts
						 			Time and Materials Contracts

							PARTS OF THE CONTRACT	
				The Contract Schedule									Contract Clauses		 			Performance
	 				Inspection and Acceptance								Subcontracts											Use of Government Property								Patents, Data, and Copyrights					 				Bond, Insurance, and Taxes								Disputes
											Payments
								 			Contract Cost Principles
									Contract Changes
										Terminations
						Terminations for Convenience					 				Terminations for Default
									Public Policies
	 				Labor Standards						 				Labor Surplus Areas										Equal Employment Opportunity				Preferred  Products and Services				 				Sanctions Against Improper Conduct
			 			Examination of Records and Audits

**CHAPTER 6.  CONCLUSIONS**
**APPENDIX:  ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION**
**AVAILABILITY OF THE REGULATIONS**
**GPO BOOKSTORES**
**READER'S COMMENT SHEET**

Home | Publications
##### 



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 Endeavour International Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2004 (the Report), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, William L. Transier, Co-Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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, 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 Company. /s/ William L. TransierWilliam L. TransierCo-Chief Executive Officer March 11, 2005 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Endeavour International Corporation and will be retained by Endeavour International Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-14-0107-Status of the Accident Sequence Precursor Program and the Standardized Plant Analysis Risk Models

Accession Number: ML14230A084

Date Released: Thursday, October 23, 2014

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML14230A090 - SECY-14-0107:  Enclosure 1 - Results, Trends and Insights of the Accident Sequence Prescursor Program (20 page(s), 10/6/2014)
    - ML14230A102 - SECY-14-0107:  Status of the Accident Sequence Precursor Program and the Standardized Plant Analysis Risk Models (6 page(s), 10/6/2014)
    - ML14230A094 - SECY-14-0107:  Enclosure 2-Status of the Standardized Plant Risk Models (6 page(s), 10/6/2014)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 2 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 3 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 4 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 5 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 6 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 7 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 8 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 9 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00089-CKK Document 25 Filed 02/04/10 Page 10 of 10
Exhibit 32








Certification
of Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I,  Cyrus
Boga, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 of Tremont Fair, Inc. fully
complies  with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Tremont Fair, Inc.





Date:  November
13, 2009





By:  /s/
Cyrus
Boga


Cyrus Boga,


Chief Executive Officer,
and


Principal Financial
Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH 

NO. 02-16-00426-CR 

Charleston Lamon Moody 

v. 

The State of Texas 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

From the 213th District Court 

of Tarrant County (1435754D) 

July 20, 2017 

Opinion by Chief Justice Livingston 

(nfp) 

JUDGMENT 

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed. 

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Terrie Livingston 

 Chief Justice Terrie Livingston
**CERTIFICATION
      OF**


**CHIEF
      EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**


**CHIEF
      FINANCIAL OFFICER**


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





In
      connection with the accompanying Yearly Report on Form 10-KSB of Service Air
      Group, Inc. (f/k/a Segway V Corp.) for the year ending December 31, 2006, I,
      Mohammad Sultan, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Executive Officer of Service
      Air Group, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
      knowledge and belief, that:





1.  Such
      Year
      End Report of Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2006, 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 such Yearly Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
      December 31, 2006 fairly represents in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of Service Air
      Group, Inc.





Dated: **April
      15, 2007**





SERVICE
      AIR GROUP, INC.








By:
      /s/ Mohammad Sultan


Chief
      Executive Officer


Chief
      Financial Officer
### §611. Duty to report violations

During the regular course of the duties of the Administrator of General Services, if the Administrator becomes aware of a violation of section 1343, 1344, or 1349(b) of title 31 or of section 641 of title 18 involving the conversion by a Federal Government official or employee of a Government-owned or leased motor vehicle to the official or employee's own use or to the use of others, the Administrator shall report the violation to the head of the agency in which the official or employee is employed, for further investigation and either appropriate disciplinary action under section 1343, 1344, or 1349(b) of title 31 or, if appropriate, referral to the Attorney General for prosecution under section 641 of title 18.

(Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1124; Pub. L. 109–284, §6(7), Sept. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 1212.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 611 | 40:491(l). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title II, §211(l), as added Sept. 5, 1950, ch. 849, §5(c), 64 Stat. 583; Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1211, §2, 68 Stat. 1128. |

Section

The words "section 1343, 1344, or 1349(b) of title 31" are substituted for "section 5 of the Act of July 16, 1914, as amended (5 U.S.C. 78)" and "such section 5" in section 211(l) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 because of section 4(b) of the Act of September 13, 1982 (Public Law 97–258, 96 Stat. 1067), the first section of which enacted Title 31, United States Code.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–284 inserted "of title 31" after "under section 1343, 1344, or 1349(b)" and "of title 18" after "under section 641".