alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Drug Guild Distributors, Respondent, v 3-9 Drugs Inc., Doing Business as Farmacia Central, Appellant.

[715 NYS2d 442]

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the *198Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), entered March 22, 1999, which granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, and (2) a judgment of the same court, dated April 7, 1999, which is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $41,912.45. The notice of appeal from the order is also deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment *(see,*CPLR 5501 [c]).

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see, Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment *(see,*CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to ' the plaintiff on the complaint. In support of its motion, the plaintiff came forward with documentary evidence which demonstrated that it had supplied $41,912.45 worth of goods to the defendant and that the defendant failed to pay for the goods. The plaintiff presented, *inter alia,*detailed invoices and corresponding signed delivery receipts, and the defendant’s statement of account showing an outstanding balance of $41,912.45. Therefore, the plaintiff demonstrated a prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320; *Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851). The burden then shifted to the defendant to come forward with evidence in admissible form to establish the existence of a material issue of fact requiring a trial *(see, Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557). However, the defendant merely alleged, by an affidavit of its president and an affirmation of counsel, that it never ordered or received these goods, and that the invoices, receipts, and account statement produced by the plaintiff were fraudulent. The defendant’s conclusory denial of the transactions is. insufficient to counter the facts established by the plaintiffs documentary evidence.

There is no merit to the defendant’s contention that summary judgment was premature because discovery was not complete. The moving papers did not indicate that there were any facts within the exclusive control of the plaintiff that remained to be discovered *(see,*CPLR 3212 [f|). The defendant may not rely upon mere hope that evidence sufficient to defeat the motion may be uncovered during the discovery process *(see,*
      *199
      *Weltmann v RWP Group,*232 AD2d 550; *Aminov v East 50th St. Rest. Corp.,*232 AD2d 592).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann and Smith, JJ., concur.
#### § 903.3 Rulings on materials.

The Board may at any stage of the proceedings exclude materials from the record of proceedings at the request of a party or on its own initiative, on the grounds that such materials are irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitive.
###### Editorial Note on Part 65

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 65 appear at 64 FR 54540, Oct. 7, 1999.

#### § 65.3 Reference of applications.

The Secretary of State of the Department of State shall refer the applications to the proper department or agency of the Government for advice as to what reply should be made to the application.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2711 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,3,6-Naphthalenetrisulfonic acid, 7- 

[[2-[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4-[[4-[4-[2-[[4-[[3-[(aminocarb onyl)amino]- 

4-[(3,6,8-trisulfo-2-naphthalenyl)azo]phenyl]ami o]-6-chloro-1,3,5-triazin2-yl]amino]ethyl]-1-piperazinyl]- - chloro-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl]amino]phenyl]azo]-, lithium potassium sodium salt)-. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 26, 2005 

Mrs. MYRICK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,3,6- 

Naphthalenetrisulfonic acid, 7-[[2- 

[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4-[[4-[4-[2-[[4-[[3-[(aminocarb 

onyl)amino]-4-[(3,6,8-trisulfo-2- 

naphthalenyl)azo]phenyl]ami o]-6-chloro-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl]amino]ethyl]-1-piperazinyl]- - chloro-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl]amino]phenyl]azo]-, lithium potassium sodium 

salt)-. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2711 IH 

1 SECTION 1. 1,3,6-NAPHTHALENETRISULFONIC ACID, 7-[[2- 

2 [(AMINOCARBONYL)AMINO]-4-[[4-[4-[2-[[4-[[3- 

3 [(AMINOCARBONYL)AMINO]-4-[(3,6,8- 

4 TRISULFO-2- 

5 NAPHTHALENYL)AZO]PHENYL]AMINO]-6- 

6 CHLORO-1,3,5-TRIAZIN-2-YL]AMINO]ETHYL]-1- 

7 PIPERAZINYL]-6-CHLORO-1,3,5-TRIAZIN-2- 

8 YL]AMINO]PHENYL]AZO]-, LITHIUM POTAS9 SIUM SODIUM SALT)-. 

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

11 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

12 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

13 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.12.16 9,10–1,3,6- 

Naphthalenetrisulfonic acid, 

7-[[2- 

[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4- 

[[4-[4-[2-[[4-[[3- 

[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4- 

[(3,6,8-trisulfo-2- 

naphthalenyl)azo]phenyl]amino]-6- 

chloro-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl]amino]ethyl]-1- 

piperazinyl]-6-chloro-1,3,5- 

triazin-2- 

yl]amino]phenyl]azo]-, lithium potassium sodium salt 

(CAS No. 202667–43–4) 

(provided for in subheading 

3204.16.30) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

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

15 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

16 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

17 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
§ 521.46 Compromise or settlement. ( a ) Parties may make offers of compromise or settlement at any time.
( b ) The reviewing official has the exclusive authority to compromise or settle a case under this part at any time after the date on which the reviewing official is permitted to issue a complaint and before the date on which the ALJ issues an initial decision.
( c ) The Director has exclusive authority to compromise or settle a case under this part at any time after the date on which the ALJ issues an initial decision, except during pendency of any review under § 521.42 or during the pendency of any action to collect penalties and assessments under § 521.43.
( d ) The Attorney General has exclusive authority to compromise or settle a case under this part during the pendency of any review under § 521.42 or of any action to recover penalties and assessments under 31 U.S.C. 3806.
( e ) The investigating official may recommend settlement terms to the reviewing official, the Director, or the Attorney General, as appropriate. The reviewing official may recommend settlement terms to the Director, or the Attorney General, as appropriate.
( f ) Any compromise or settlement must be in writing.
#### § 92.93 Notarial services or authentications connected with service of process by other persons.

An officer of the Foreign Service may administer an oath to a person making an affidavit to the effect that legal process has ben served. When an affidavit stating that legal process has been served is executed before a foreign notary or other official, an officer of the Foreign Service may authenticate the official character of the person administering the oath. The fee for administering an oath to a person making an affidavit or for an authentication, as the case may be, is as prescribed under the caption “Notarial Services and Authentications” in the Tariff of Fees, Foreign Service of the United States of America (§ 22.1 of this chapter), unless the case is of such nature as to fall under the caption, “Exemption for Federal Agencies and Corporations” of the same Tariff.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David Gonzalez, Appellant.

[716 NYS2d 569]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna Recant, J., at plea; Arlene Goldberg, J., at sentence), rendered on or about July 21, 1998, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to CPL 460.20, defendant has the right to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within thirty (30) days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the Judge or Justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other Judge or Justice. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rubin, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.
### §424. Repealed. Pub. L. 85–840, title II, §206, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 1025

Section, act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title II, §224, as added Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 836, title I, §103(a), 70 Stat. 816; amended July 17, 1957, Pub. L. 85–109, §2(a), 71 Stat. 308, related to reduction of benefits based on disability.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal applicable with respect to monthly benefits under this subchapter for August 1958 and succeeding months, see section 207(a) of Pub. L. 85–840, set out as an Effective Date of 1958 Amendment note under section 416 of this title.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2646 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2646

  To eliminate certain restrictions on air transportation to and from 
                           Love Field, Texas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 26, 2005

 Mr. Hensarling (for himself and Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas) introduced 
      the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To eliminate certain restrictions on air transportation to and from 
                           Love Field, Texas.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Right to Fly Act''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF RESTRICTION.

     Section 29 of the International Air Transportation Competition Act 
of 1979 (94 Stat. 48) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT CROYDON PLASTICS COMPANY, INC.

v. GROEN, LAVESON, GOLDBERG & RUBENSTONE, EDWARD RUBENSTONE & ELLIOT KOLODNY,

v. GARLAND D. CHERRY, JR., ROBERT STUTMAN, WALTER J. TIMBY, JR., R. ERICK CHIZMAR PETITION OF: CROYDON PLASTICS COMPANY, INC. : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 304 MAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 15th day of October, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 71 FR 34520 and 34521, June 15, 2006.

§ 40.104 Unlawful voters. ( a ) Subject to paragraph (b) of this section, an alien is ineligible for a visa if the alien has voted in violation of any Federal, State, or local constitutional provision, statute, ordinance, or regulation.
( b ) Such alien shall not be considered to be ineligible under paragraph (a) of this section if each natural parent of the alien (or, in the case of an adopted alien, each adoptive parent of the alien) is or was a citizen (whether by birth or naturalization), the alien permanently resided in the United States prior to attaining the age of 16, and the alien reasonably believed at the time of such violation that he or she was a citizen.
[70 FR 35527, June 21, 2005]
IB 

Union Calendar No. 229 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2563 

[Report No. 109–420] 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies to 

address certain water shortages within the Snake, Boise, and Payette 

River systems in Idaho, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2005 

Mr. OTTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Resources 

APRIL 25, 2006 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on May 24, 2005] 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies to address certain water shortages within 

the Snake, Boise, and Payette River systems in Idaho, 

and for other purposes. 

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


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2563 RH 

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT FEASIBILITY STUD2 IES. 

3 (a) AUTHORITY.—The Secretary of the Interior, acting 

4 through the Bureau of Reclamation, is authorized to con5 duct feasibility studies on projects that address water short6 ages within the Snake, Boise, and Payette River systems 

7 in Idaho, and deemed appropriate for further study by the 

8 2006 Bureau of Reclamation Boise Payette water storage 

9 assessment report. Studies conducted under this section 

10 must comply with Bureau of Reclamation policy standards 

11 and guidelines for studies. 

12 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

13 authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Inte14 rior $3,000,000 to carry out this section. 

15 (c) SUNSET OF AUTHORITY.—The authority of the Sec16 retary of the Interior to carry out this section shall termi17 nate 10 years after the date of the enactment of this section. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS

rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 229 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2563 

[Report No. 109

–420] 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conRiver systems in Idaho, and for other purposes. shortages within the Snake, Boise, and Payette duct feasibility studies to address certain water 

APRIL 25, 2006 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
### §4370a. Assistant Administrators of Environmental Protection Agency; appointment; duties

(a) The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, may appoint three Assistant Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency in addition to—

(1) the five Assistant Administrators provided for in section 1(d) of Reorganization Plan Numbered 3 of 1970 (5 U.S.C. Appendix);

(2) the Assistant Administrator provided by section 2625(g) of title 15; and

(3) the Assistant Administrator provided by section 6911a of this title.

(b) Each Assistant Administrator appointed under subsection (a) shall perform such duties as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency may prescribe.

(Pub. L. 98–80, §1, Aug. 23, 1983, 97 Stat. 485.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Reorganization Plan Numbered 3 of 1970, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is set out under section 4321 of this title.

#### Codification

Section was not enacted as part of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 which comprises this chapter.
§ 92.32 Notarial certificate to acknowledgment. ( a ) *Title.* The notarial certificate evidencing the taking of an acknowledgment is commonly known as a “certificate of acknowledgment” or sometimes simply as an “acknowledgment.”
( b ) *Form.* The form of a certificate of acknowledgment varies widely depending on the laws of the jurisdiction where the acknowledged document is intended to be used, the purpose for which the document is intended, and the legal position of the persons who have executed it. Instruments to be acknowledged are frequently prepared on printed forms, the entire contract or deed being on one sheet together with the certificate of acknowledgment. Often the document, including the certificate of acknowledgment, is drawn up in advance by an attorney. In these cases, the notarizing officer may use the certificate which is already on the document, making whatever modifications are manifestly required to show that the certificate was executed by a notarizing officer. However, if he finds it necessary to prepare the certificate of acknowledgment, the officer should consult the appropriate reference work for guidance as to the proper form. When no prescribed form can be found, the officer should use the language in Form FS-88. Certificate of Acknowledgment of Execution of an Instrument, inserting the certificate immediately at the close of the deed on the last page if space permits, or, if a separate sheet is necessary, using the printed Form FS-88 itself.
[22 FR 10858, Dec. 27, 1957, as amended at 60 FR 51723, Oct. 3, 1995]
#### Ruth Mandell et al., Respondents, v. Harriet W. Field et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the *1075defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated June 1, 1960, which grants plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment striking out defendants’ answer, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, and which directs an assessment of damages. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. According to plaintiffs’ version of the accident, the automobile operated by the plaintiff Edward Mandell was stopped at an intersection controlled by a traffic control signal, in obedience to a red light prohibiting traffic in the direction in which he was proceeding; and said automobile had been so stopped for about 30 seconds when it was struck in the rear by the vehicle operated by the defendant Harriet Field. According to defendant Field’s version of the accident, as set forth in her affidavit submitted in opposition to the motion, when her vehicle reached a point about two car lengths from the intersection, the light was green for traffic proceeding in her direction, and the automobile operated by plaintiff Edward Mandell, without warning, came to an abrupt stop directly in the path of her vehicle. It was also stated in opposition to the motion, that plaintiff Edward Mandell had testified in an examination before trial that when he was about 30 feet from the corner the light changed from green to yellow and was red when he reached the corner. Apparently the motion was granted because the learned Justice at Special Term was convinced hy various inconsistent statements made by defendant Field, prior to the motion for summary judgment, that no real issue existed concerning her negligence or the lack of contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff Edward Mandell. The effect of the inconsistencies and all other questions of fact, including those of credibility, must be determined, however, by the trier of the facts, and may not be summarily decided on affidavits. On the proof submitted, it may not be said that plaintiffs’ claim was established sufficiently to warrant the court, as a matter of law, in directing judgment in their favor. Nolan, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
### §5903. Duties and authorities of the Secretary

The Secretary shall—

(a) review the current status of nonnuclear energy resources and current nonnuclear energy research and development activities, including research and development being conducted by Federal and non-Federal entities;

(b) formulate and carry out a comprehensive Federal nonnuclear energy research, development, and demonstration program which will expeditiously advance the policies established by this chapter and other relevant legislation establishing programs in specific energy technologies;

(c) utilize the funds authorized pursuant to this chapter to advance energy research and development by initiating and maintaining, through fund transfers, grants, or contracts, energy research, development and demonstration programs or activities utilizing the facilities, capabilities, expertise, and experience of Federal agencies, national laboratories, universities, nonprofit organizations, industrial entities, and other non-Federal entities which are appropriate to each type of research, development, and demonstration activity;

(d) establish procedures for periodic consultation with representatives of science, industry, environmental organizations, consumers, and other groups who have special expertise in the areas of energy research, development, and technology; and

(e) initiate programs to design, construct, and operate energy facilities of sufficient size to demonstrate the technical and economic feasibility of utilizing various forms of nonnuclear energy.

(Pub. L. 93–577, §4, Dec. 31, 1974, 88 Stat. 1880; Pub. L. 109–58, title X, §1009(b)(3), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 934.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2005—Pub. L. 109–58 added section catchline, struck out former catchline, and substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator" in introductory provisions.

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

#### Classification of Recipients of Awards, Contracts, or Other Financial Arrangements; Reporting Requirement

Pub. L. 95–39, title I, §111, June 3, 1977, 91 Stat. 186, provided that:

"(a) The Administrator [now Secretary of Energy] shall classify each recipient of any award, contract, or other financial arrangement in any nonnuclear research, development, or demonstration category as—

"(1) a Federal agency,

"(2) a non-Federal governmental entity,

"(3) a profitmaking enterprise (indicating whether or not it is a small business concern),

"(4) a nonprofit enterprise other than an educational institution, or

"(5) a nonprofit educational institution.

"(b) The information required by subsection (a), along with the dollar amount of each award, contract, or other financial arrangement made, shall be included as an appendix to the annual report required by section 15(a) of the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 ([former] 42 U.S.C. 5914): Provided, That small purchases or contracts of less than $10,000, which are excepted from the requirements of advertising by section 252(c)(3) of [former] title 41, United States Code, shall be exempt from the reporting requirements of this section."
#### § 92.13 Form of notarial certificate.

The form of a notarial certificate depends on the nature of the notarial act it attests. (See §§ 92.18 to 92.48 for discussions of the various forms of notarial certificates.) Rules pertaining to venue, and signing and sealing, are common to all notarial certificates.