alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Angelina T. Deleno, Respondent, v Benjamin J. Deleno, Appelllant.

In a matrimonial action, the defendant appeals: (1) as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 24, 1977, as made provisions for alimony and child support and directed the sale of a certain parcel of property located in Dutchess County and provided for a distribution of the proceeds of such sale equally between the parties; and (2) from a further order of the same court, dated August 30, 1977, which allowed the plaintiff a counsel fee and certain printing expenses. Order dated March 24, 1977 modified, on the law, by deleting the final decretal paragraph therefrom. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. Order dated August 30, 1977 affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The evidence before the trial court was to the effect that the defendant had owned a parcel of land in Dutchess County for over 20 years, that he had a deed prepared making his wife a joint owner thereof with himself, that he had showed her a photostat of such deed, that she thereafter commenced the instant action for divorce, that the defendant then changed his mind and destroyed the deed and that he made a gift of the property to his sister, charging her the sum of one dollar therefor. It also appeared that the plaintiff had commenced an action in Dutchess County against the defendant seeking remuneration for the property, which action was pending at the time of the hearing herein. It appears that no prayer for relief by the plaintiff with regard to the Dutchess County property was before the trial court and that no issue concerning the property was actually before that court. Nevertheless, in determining the issues of support and custody, the trial court also directed that the property in question be sold and that the proceeds of such sale be divided equally between the parties. We believe this was error for the following reasons: (1) the controversy between the parties as to the property in question was already the subject of another pending action; (2) the proper venue of such action, which sought to affect title to or possession of real property was Dutchess County (see CPLR 507) and the issue with respect to title or possession was not raised here in a manner contemplated by section 234 of the Domestic Relations Law; (3) no waiver of any objection to the forum was effected by the husband’s failure to object on such ground before the trial court as he apparently had no notice that such a disposition would be made *789until that court rendered its decision; and (4) the husband’s sister is a necessary party to any action concerning title to the Dutchess County property. We have considered the other points raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Hopkins, J. P., Titone, Suozzi and Hargett, JJ., concur.
### §300bb–1. State and local governmental group health plans must provide continuation coverage to certain individuals

#### (a) In general

In accordance with regulations which the Secretary shall prescribe, each group health plan that is maintained by any State that receives funds under this chapter, by any political subdivision of such a State, or by any agency or instrumentality of such a State or political subdivision, shall provide, in accordance with this subchapter, that each qualified beneficiary who would lose coverage under the plan as a result of a qualifying event is entitled, under the plan, to elect, within the election period, continuation coverage under the plan.

#### (b) Exception for certain plans

Subsection (a) shall not apply to—

(1) any group health plan for any calendar year if all employers maintaining such plan normally employed fewer than 20 employees on a typical business day during the preceding calendar year, or

(2) any group health plan maintained for employees by the government of the District of Columbia or any territory or possession of the United States or any agency or instrumentality.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXII, §2201, as added Pub. L. 99–272, title X, §10003(a), Apr. 7, 1986, 100 Stat. 232; amended Pub. L. 101–239, title VI, §6801(a)(1), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2296.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1989—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–239 struck out at end "Under regulations, rules similar to the rules of subsections (a) and (b) of section 52 of title 26 (relating to employers under common control) shall apply for purposes of paragraph (1)."

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1989 Amendment

Pub. L. 101–239, title VI, §6801(a)(2), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2297, provided that: "The amendment made by paragraph (1) [amending this section] shall apply to years beginning after December 31, 1986."

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 99–272, title X, §10003(b), Apr. 7, 1986, 100 Stat. 236, provided that:

"(1) General rule.—The amendments made by this section [enacting this subchapter] shall apply to plan years beginning on or after July 1, 1986.

"(2) Special rule for collective bargaining agreements.—In the case of a group health plan maintained pursuant to one or more collective bargaining agreements between employee representatives and one or more employers ratified before the date of the enactment of this Act [Apr. 7, 1986], the amendments made by this section shall not apply to plan years beginning before the later of—

"(A) the date on which the last of the collective bargaining agreements relating to the plan terminates (determined without regard to any extension thereof agreed to after the date of the enactment of this Act), or

"(B) January 1, 1987.

For purposes of subparagraph (A), any plan amendment made pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement relating to the plan which amends the plan solely to conform to any requirement added by this section shall not be treated as a termination of such collective bargaining agreement."
§ 120.32 Defense service. ( a ) *Defense service* means: ( 1 ) The furnishing of assistance (including training) to foreign persons, whether in the United States or abroad in the design, development, engineering, manufacture, production, assembly, testing, repair, maintenance, modification, operation, demilitarization, destruction, processing, or use of defense articles;
( 2 ) The furnishing to foreign persons of any technical data controlled under this subchapter, whether in the United States or abroad; or
( 3 ) Military training of foreign units and forces, regular and irregular, including formal or informal instruction of foreign persons in the United States or abroad or by correspondence courses, technical, educational, or information publications and media of all kinds, training aid, orientation, training exercise, and military advice.
( b ) [Reserved]
#### §§ 219.152-219.159 [Reserved]
#### § 130.16 Other reporting requirements.

The submission of reports under this part does not relieve any person of any requirements to furnish information to any federal, state, or municipal agency, department or other instrumentality as required by law, regulation or contract.
###### Editorial Note on Part 218

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 218 appear at 68 FR 51363, Aug. 26, 2003.

#### § 218.38 Remedial action by recipient.

Where the agency head finds a recipient has discriminated on the basis of age, the recipient shall take any remedial action that the agency head may require to overcome the effects of the discrimination. If another recipient exercises control over the recipient that has discriminated, the agency head may require both recipients to take remedial action.
Case 3:08-cv-00240-MEJ Document 75 Filed 02/26/10 Page 1 of 3
26

Case 3:08-cv-00240-MEJ Document 75 Filed 02/26/10 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:08-cv-00240-MEJ Document 75 Filed 02/26/10 Page 3 of 3
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
                TO SECTION 905 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Communitycorp (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report"),
Gwendlyn P. Bunton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my Knowledge, that:

         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 results of operations of the
Company.


Date:  August 12, 2002                             By:  /s/ Gwen P. Bunton
                                                      --------------------------
                                                        Gwen P. Bunton
                                                   Its: Chief Financial Officer
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 2004 / Presidential Documents 74941

Memorandum of December 8, 2004

Delegation of Certain Reporting Authority 

Memorandum for the Secretary of Agriculture 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States, including section 301 of title 3, United States 

Code, I hereby delegate to you the functions conferred upon the President 

by section 13 of Public Law 806, 80th Congress (15 U.S.C. 714k), to provide 

the specified report to the Congress. 

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal 

[FR Doc. 04–27469

Filed 12–13–04; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 

Register

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, December 8, 2004. 

.

W
#### Shafayet Reja, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Thomas Romo, III, Respondent.

[715 NYS2d 148]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J., and a jury), entered August 12, 1999, in a medical malpractice action, awarding plaintiff damages in the principal amount of $175,000, unanimously modified, on the facts, to remand the matter for a new trial only on the issue of damages for future pain and suffering, and otherwise affirmed, without costs, unless, within 30 days of the date of this order, defendant stipulates to increase the award for future pain and suffering to $175,000 and to entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith.

Plaintiff was born without a right ear and underwent surgery when he was 10 years old to have an ear surgically reconstructed. The jury found that the reconstruction failed because of defendant’s malpractice, and awarded plaintiff $75,000 for past pain and suffering and $100,000 for future pain and suffering over 10 years. Upon review of this record, we find the jury’s award for future pain and suffering deviates materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances and increase it to the extent indicated. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Wallach, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Desiree Dietz, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Suffolk County Legal Aid Society (Alfred J. Cicale, Esq.), for appellant.District Attorney Suffolk County (Michael J. Brennan, Esq.), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal by defendant, as limited by the brief, from a sentence of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Gaetan B. Lozito, J.), imposed April 27, 2016, upon defendant's conviction, upon her plea of guilty, of petit larceny.</p><p>ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.</p><p>In January 2015, pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant was to be sentenced on her conviction of petit larceny to three years of probation, restitution, and an order of protection so long as, among other things, defendant had no new charges filed against her prior to sentencing. At sentencing in April 2016, it was revealed that, in the interim, defendant had been arrested on felony charges, on which she had been sentenced to a term of imprisonment. The District Court then imposed an enhanced sentence of, among other things, a year of incarceration to run concurrently with her felony sentence. Defendant appeals, as limited by her brief, from the sentence.</p><p>Inasmuch as defendant has served the enhanced sentence in full, her contention that the District Court improperly imposed it has been rendered academic (<a href="../2015/2015_03580.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Walker</i>, 127 AD3d 1506</a> [2015]; <a href="../2006/2006_05391.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Nicholson</i>, 31 AD3d 468</a>, 469 [2006]; <i>People v Farmer</i>, 50 Misc <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>3d 141[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 50199[U], *2 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th &amp; 10th Jud Dists 2016];<i> People v Pompi</i>, 31 Misc 3d 145[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 50936[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th &amp; 10th Jud Dists 2011]).</p><p>Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as moot.</p><p>Marano, P.J., Iannacci and Garguilo, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: May 23, 2017<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
EXHIBIT
31.1





SIGNATURES




Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by
the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized





ONCOLIN
THERAPEUTICS, INC.




By:  /s/
J. Leonard Ivins


J.
Leonard Ivins, Chief Executive Officer


Date: May
19, 2010




Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.




Signature
              Title
              Date/s/
      J. Leonard Ivins
              Chief
      Executive Officer and
              May
      19, 2010J.
      Leonard Ivins
              Chairman
      of the Board
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEGAL ADDITIONS LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEROME KOWALKSI, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-08-2754 EMC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(Docket No. 140)

Plaintiff Legal Additions LLC has asked for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. 

Having considered Legal Additions’s brief and accompanying submissions, the Court hereby

GRANTS Legal Additions leave to file the motion to reconsider. 

The Court is satisfied that Legal Additions has made an adequate showing under Civil Local

Rule 7-9(b) to justify the filing of a motion to reconsider. Moreover, because the issue of the

economic loss rule, particularly as applied to Mr. Kowalski as an individual, was not an issue raised

in Defendants’ motion or fully briefed thereafter, the Court concludes that, in the interest of due

process, it shall allow the filing of the motion to reconsider.

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:08-cv-02754-EMC Document 143 Filed 04/28/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The Court hereby deems Legal Additions’s motion for leave to file, located at Docket No.

140, its substantive motion to reconsider. Defendants are ordered to file an opposition to the motion

by May 7, 2010. Any reply shall be filed by May 11, 2010. If, after reviewing the briefs, the Court

deems a hearing on the motion necessary, it shall so notify the parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 28, 2010

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02754-EMC Document 143 Filed 04/28/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         184,000
<SECURITIES>                                 4,850,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,078,000
<PP&E>                                      11,358,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 547,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,628,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,134,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,857,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,628,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               304,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,423,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             778,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,119,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,119,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,119,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.80)


</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4246 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the expansion of 

eligibility for veteran reimbursement for emergency treatment provided 

in non-Department of Veterans Affairs facilities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 22, 2012 

Mr. DEFAZIO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the 

expansion of eligibility for veteran reimbursement for 

emergency treatment provided in non-Department of Veterans Affairs facilities. 

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 ‘‘VA Enrollment Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4246 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR VETERAN REIM2 BURSEMENT FOR EMERGENCY TREATMENT 

3 PROVIDED IN A NON-DEPARTMENT OF VET4 ERANS AFFAIRS FACILITY. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1725(b)(2) of title 38, 

6 United States Code, is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ and 

8 inserting ‘‘or’’; and 

9 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘received 

10 care’’ and all that follows through the period and in11 serting ‘‘enrolls in such health care system not later 

12 than 30 days after receiving the emergency treat13 ment.’’. 

14 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to emergency treat16 ment furnishes on or after the date of the enactment of 

17 this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4374 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4374

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the increased 
limitation on the cover over of the tax on distilled spirits to Puerto 
                      Rico and the Virgin Islands.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 17, 2012

    Mrs. Christensen (for herself and Mr. Pierluisi) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the increased 
limitation on the cover over of the tax on distilled spirits to Puerto 
                      Rico and the Virgin Islands.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF INCREASED LIMITATION ON COVER OVER OF TAX ON 
              DISTILLED SPIRITS TO PUERTO RICO AND THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 7652(f) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``January 1, 2012'' and 
inserting ``January 1, 2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to distilled spirits brought into the United States after 
December 31, 2011.
                                 <all>
```
**                  FOR      IMMEDIATE      RELEASE                                                                                                              **

**                                                                 **

**CONTACT:                                                  Investors:       Ann Taylor(404) 676-5383**

**Media:      Dana Bolden**

**(404)      676-2683**

**THE      COCA-COLA COMPANY ANNOUNCES**

**SENIOR      LEADERSHIP SUCCESSION PLAN**

***Muhtar      Kent to Succeed Neville Isdell as Chief Executive Officer in July of 2008;      Isdell to Remain as Chairman Until 2009 Annual      Meeting***

**ATLANTA,      Dec. 6, 2007 – **

----

**The      Coca-Cola Company**

**###**

**NOTE      TO EDITORS**

----
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Texas Petrochemicals LP (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter period ending December 31, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 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; and

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


February 14, 2003                               /s/ Carl S. Stutts
                                                ------------------------------
                                                Carl S. Stutts
                                                Executive Vice President and
                                                Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carol Meade, True Name Carrol Meade, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ.