alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Pasquale De Lilli, Plaintiff, v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation et al., Defendants. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Perini Corporation, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant. General Telephone Company of Upstate New York, Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Perini Corporation, Third-Party Defendant.

Appeals by third-party defendant from orders of the Supreme Court at Special Term which denied motions for dismissal of the respective third-party complaints for insufficiency. The third-party plaintiffs — a power company and a telephone company — are charged with negligence in the construction and maintenance of a utility pole and wires whereby plaintiff, an employee of third-party defendant, was injured when the latter’s truck which plaintiff was then operating came in contact with the live wires. The utilities, in. tura, charge third-party defendant, with various acts of negligence, these *840including allegations which indisputably aver active negligence and hence need not be discussed. Appellant contends, however, that the plaintiff’s complaint alleges acts of affirmative negligence only and thus that the third-party complaints must fail. Certain of the allegations do indeed charge active negligence; but among the averments of negligent maintenance and of failure to warn of a dangerous condition due to sagging wires appear allegations susceptible of a different classification. In the liberal view we are bound to give third-party pleading, these allegations may be construed as charging passive negligence, or at least as sufficient to permit of proof which may be thus evaluated and classified, and, accordingly, in this case — which we deem clearly within the principles and intendment of third-party practice — as sufficient to warrant recovery over. The allegations which seem to us pertinent to the issue before us differ materially from those treated in *Putvin*v. *Buffalo Elec. Co.*(5 N Y 2d 447) cited by appellant, but are quite similar to those with which we dealt in *Schellhorn*v. *New York State Elec. & Gas Corp.*(283 App. Div. 678) in which we said: *“*In a situation in which the main complaint may be construed as charging the third-party plaintiff with passive negligence, even though it also charges him with active negligence, it has been the policy of this court not to dismiss such a complaint, but to leave the question of liability over until the examination of facts afforded at the trial.” In the instant case, for example, it might be possible to find negligence merely passive arising from some condition as to which third-party plaintiffs might not be chargeable with a strict duty of inspection and of which they had no more than constructive notice. (Cf. *Raping*v. *Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.,*283 App. Div. 204.) Orders unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Frank J. Adipietro, an Attorney and Counselor at Law, Respondent. Joint Bar Association Grievance Committee for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, Petitioner.

Motion by petitioner to (1) withdraw its motion to confirm the report of the Referee; (2) vacate this court’s order of September 17, 1976 which authorized the institution of this proceeding; and (3) strike respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law on the ground that respondent has been disbarred by virtue of a felony conviction. Motion granted. The motion is deemed withdrawn, its order dated September 17, 1976, authorizing the disciplinary proceeding against respondent is recalled and vacated. The respondent, admitted to practice before the Bar by this court on March 29, 1961 under the name Frank Joseph Adipietro was convicted of a felony (violation of US Code, tit 26, § 7201, willful attempt to evade payment of income tax by preparing and mailing to the Internal Revenue Service a false and fraudulent tax return on behalf of himself and his wife) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on June 7, 1976. The clerk of this court is directed to strike his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law forthwith by reason of said conviction *(Matter of Chu,*42 NY2d 490). Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Rabin, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.
### §660. Civil action to enforce child support obligations; jurisdiction of district courts

The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction, without regard to any amount in controversy, to hear and determine any civil action certified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under section 652(a)(8) of this title. A civil action under this section may be brought in any judicial district in which the claim arose, the plaintiff resides, or the defendant resides.

(Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title IV, §460, as added Pub. L. 93–647, §101(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2358; amended Pub. L. 98–369, div. B, title VI, §2663(j)(2)(B)(xi), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1170.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1984—Pub. L. 98–369 substituted "Health and Human Services" for "Health, Education, and Welfare".

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

#### Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–369 effective July 18, 1984, but not to be construed as changing or affecting any right, liability, status, or interpretation which existed (under the provisions of law involved) before that date, see section 2664(b) of Pub. L. 98–369, set out as a note under section 401 of this title.
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

ANTHONY J. BRASS (CASBN. 173302)

Attorney at Law

3223 Webster Street

San Francisco, California 94123

Telephone: (415) 922-5454

Facsimile: (415) 346-8987

Tony@brasslawoffice.com

Attorney for Defendant 

KRISTY WATTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

KRISTY WATTS,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: CR 09-0849VRW

STIPULATION OF COUNSEL AND [Proposed] 

ORDER TO CHANGE SURRENDER DATE

)

It is hereby stipulated between parties, Anthony Brass for Defendant Kristy Watts and 

Doug Sprague for the United States of America, that the surrender date for defendant be moved 

from June 4, 2010 to June 25, 2010.

Ms. Watts has been diagnosed with breast cancer. Ms. Watts needs time to meet with her 

doctors to establish a treatment plan prior to her surrendering.

KJ Gibson of pretrial services has been notified and he has no objection to moving Ms. 

Watts’ surrender date.

Case 3:09-cr-00849-VRW Document 28 Filed 06/03/10 Page 1 of 3
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

Dated: June 1, 2010 /s/______________________

DOUG SPRAGUE

Assistant United States

Dated: June 1, 2010 /s/___________________

ANTHONY BRASS

Attorney for Kristy Watts

IT IS SO ORDERED:

Dated: ____________________________

VAUGHN A. WALKER

United States District Court Judge

______________________________________________________________________________

June 3, 2010 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Judge Vaughn R Walker

VAUGHN R WALKER ... 

Case 3:09-cr-00849-VRW Document 28 Filed 06/03/10 Page 2 of 3
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

Case 3:09-cr-00849-VRW Document 28 Filed 06/03/10 Page 3 of 3
#### § 72.21 Consular officer may not assume financial responsibility for the estate.

A consular officer is not authorized to assume any financial responsibility or to incur any expense on behalf of the United States Government in collecting and disposing of the personal estate of a United States citizen or national who dies abroad. A consular officer may incur expenses on behalf of the estate only to the extent that there are funds available in the estate or from other sources (such as the next of kin).
#### John Popkin v. Rubel Corporation et al.

Motion for leave to reargue appeal or for leave to appeal to the Court of. Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.
#### Dime Savings Bank of Williamsburgh, Respondent, v Frank Folk, Also Known as Frank S. Folk, Appellant, et al.,

In a mortgage foreclosure action, defendant Frank Folk appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 1, 1976, which, *inter alia,*denied his motion to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale entered upon his default. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Appellant has failed to show that plaintiff did not comply with FHA regulations. Rather, the evidence indicates that for five months prior to bringing this action plaintiff diligently tried to contact appellant and work out some solution. In addition, plaintiff alleged, in an affidavit in opposition to the instant motion, that appellant’s attorney had spoken to its agent prior to the commencement of this action and had stated that appellant had no objection to the foreclosure. Appellant has not disputed this allegation. Latham, J. P., Rabin, Titone and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 Quarterly Report of Brantley Capital Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
P. Pinkas, Chief Executive Officer of Brantley Capital Corporation, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(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.


                                        /s/ Robert P. Pinkas
                                        -----------------------------
                                        Robert P. Pinkas
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        May 15, 2003



This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Brantley Capital
Corporation and will be retained by Brantley Capital Corporation and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### §300cc–40. Establishment of Office

#### (a) In general

There is established within the National Institutes of Health an office to be known as the Office of AIDS Research. The Office shall be headed by a director, who shall be appointed by the Secretary.

#### (b) Duties

#### (1) Interagency coordination of AIDS activities

With respect to acquired immune deficiency syndrome, the Director of the Office shall plan, coordinate, and evaluate research and other activities conducted or supported by the agencies of the National Institutes of Health. In carrying out the preceding sentence, the Director of the Office shall evaluate the AIDS activities of each of such agencies and shall provide for the periodic reevaluation of such activities.

#### (2) Consultations

The Director of the Office shall carry out this subpart (including developing and revising the plan required in section 300cc–40c of this title) in consultation with the heads of the agencies of the National Institutes of Health, with the advisory councils of the agencies, and with the advisory council established under section 300cc–40b of this title.

#### (3) Coordination

The Director of the Office shall act as the primary Federal official with responsibility for overseeing all AIDS research conducted or supported by the National Institutes of Health, and

(A) shall serve to represent the National Institutes of Health AIDS Research Program at all relevant Executive branch task forces and committees; and

(B) shall maintain communications with all relevant Public Health Service agencies and with various other departments of the Federal Government, to ensure the timely transmission of information concerning advances in AIDS research and the clinical treatment of acquired immune deficiency syndrome and its related conditions, between these various agencies for dissemination to affected communities and health care providers.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXIII, §2351, as added Pub. L. 103–43, title XVIII, §1801(a)(3), June 10, 1993, 107 Stat. 192.)
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2648 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to require Medicaid drug 

utilization review programs to deny coverage of erectile dysfunction drugs 

for individuals registered (or required to be registered) as sex offenders. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 26, 2005 

Mr. FOSSELLA (for himself, Mr. STEARNS, Mrs. MCCARTHY, Mr. WALDEN of 

Oregon, Mr. NEY, Mr. GOODE, Mr. KUHL of New York, Mr. GIBBONS, 

and Mr. ENGEL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to require 

Medicaid drug utilization review programs to deny coverage of erectile dysfunction drugs for individuals registered (or required to be registered) as sex offenders. 

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

•HR 2648 IH 

1 SECTION 1. REQUIRING MEDICAID DRUG UTILIZATION RE2 VIEW PROGRAMS TO DENY COVERAGE OF 

3 ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION DRUGS FOR INDI4 VIDUALS REGISTERED (OR REQUIRED TO BE 

5 REGISTERED) AS SEX OFFENDERS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1927(g)(2) of the Social 

7 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-8(g)(2)) is amended by 

8 adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

9 ‘‘(E) DENIAL OF COVERAGE OF ERECTILE

10 DYSFUNCTION DRUGS FOR INDIVIDUALS REG11 ISTERED (OR REQUIRED TO BE REGISTERED) AS

12 SEX OFFENDERS.— 

13 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The program shall 

14 provide for denying coverage for any erec15 tile dysfunction drug for any individual 

16 who is registered (or a person required to 

17 register) under section 170101 or 170102 

18 of the Violent Crime Control and Law En19 forcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14071, 

20 14072). 

21 ‘‘(ii) REPORT ON ENFORCEMENT.— 

22 Not later than 6 months after the date of 

23 the enactment of this subparagraph, each 

24 State shall submit to the Secretary a re25 port on specific steps the State has taken 
3 

•HR 2648 IH 

1 under its program to assure the denial of 

2 coverage described in clause (i).’’. 

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

4 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enact5 ment of this Act and shall apply to the denial of drugs 

6 furnished on or after such date. 

Æ
8:45:05 11/3/2006 14:15:05 11/3/2006 19:45:05 11/3/2006 1:15:05 11/4/2006 6:45:05 11/4/2006 12:15:05 11/4/2006 17:45:05 11/4/2006 23:15:05 11/4/2006 4:45:05 11/5/2006 10:15:05 11/5/2006 15:45:05 11/5/2006 21:15:05 11/5/2006 2:45:05 11/6/2006 8:15:05 11/6/2006 13:45:05 11/6/2006 19:15:05 11/6/2006 0:45:05 11/7/2006 6:15:05 11/7/2006 11:45:05 11/7/2006 17:15:05 11/7/2006 22:45:05 11/7/2006 4:15:05 11/8/2006 9:45:05 11/8/2006 15:15:05 11/8/2006 20:45:05 11/8/2006 2:15:05 11/9/2006 7:45:05 11/9/2006 13:15:05 11/9/2006 18:45:05 11/9/2006 0:15:05 11/10/2006 5:45:05 11/10/2006 11:15:05 11/10/2006 16:45:05 11/10/2006 22:15:05 11/10/2006 3:45:05 11/11/2006 9:15:05 11/11/2006 14:45:05 11/11/2006 20:15:05 11/11/2006 1:45:05 11/12/2006 7:15:05 11/12/2006 12:45:05 11/12/2006 18:15:05 11/12/2006 23:45:05 11/12/2006 5:15:05 11/13/2006 10:45:05 11/13/2006 16:15:05 11/13/2006 21:45:05 11/13/2006 3:15:05 11/14/2006 8:45:05 11/14/2006 14:15:05 11/14/2006 19:45:05 11/14/2006 1:15:05 11/15/2006 6:45:05 11/15/2006 12:15:05 11/15/2006 17:45:05 11/15/2006 23:15:05 11/15/2006 4:45:05 11/16/2006 10:15:05 11/16/2006 15:45:05 11/16/2006 21:15:05 11/16/2006 2:45:05 11/17/2006 8:15:05 11/17/2006

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

Pierce Co. OWB 11/3/06 to 11/17/06

S SE S S NW NNE W ESE NNE N Calm

Date & Time 

Note: This data was collected on the front porch of the subjects home which is about 1,100 feet to the NW of the OWB. Wind direction is shown at the top of the chart. Winds out of the E, SE should impact the subject home the most. 

subje

OW
ex101.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 


 



PREMIUM HOMES, LLC


SALE OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST AGREEMENT


 


This SALE OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this day of August, 2010 by Terry L. Lee and Lee Holding Company, L.P. ("Seller") and Lee Oil Company, lnc. ("Purchaser") of Premium Homes, LLC a Kentucky limited liability company ("Company") filed with the Kentucky Secretary of State File # 0659473.06.


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, Seller, Terry L, Lee (50% ownership interest) and Lee Holding Company, L.P. (50% ownership interest), wish to sell, assign and transfer all of their right, title and interest (100% ownership) in and to the Company to Purchaser, Lee Oil Company, Inc. for the sum on one hundred and forty thousand dollars ($140,000.00) payable in $10,000.00 cash and 650,000 shares of Heartland, Inc common stock. This transfer shall become effective as of the date first mentioned in this agreement (August 01, 2010).


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of one dollar ($140,000.00) the Seller, Terry L Lee and Lee Holding Company, L.P. sells their 100% interest in Premium Homes, LLC a Kentucky limited liability company to Purchaser, Lee Oil Company, Inc, In addition to this ownership transfer by signing this agreement the Members appoint Terry L. Lee as Chief Manager and shall exercise all power authorized as Chief Manager of Premium Homes, LLC.
§ 51.52 Exemption from payment of passport fees. ( a ) A person who is exempt from the payment of passport fees under this section may obtain a passport book only for no charge. A passport card will not be issued for no charge to the individuals exempt from the payment of passport fees under this section.
( b ) The following persons are exempt from payment of passport fees except for the passport execution fee, unless their applications are executed before a federal official, in which case they are also exempt from payment of the passport execution fee: ( 1 ) An officer or employee of the United States traveling on official business and the members of his or her immediate family. The applicant must submit evidence of the official purpose of the travel and, if applicable, authorization for the members of his or her immediate family to accompany or reside with him or her abroad.
( 2 ) An American seaman who requires a passport in connection with his or her duties aboard a United States flag vessel.
( 3 ) A widow, widower, child, parent, brother or sister of a deceased member of the United States Armed Forces proceeding abroad to visit the grave of such service member or to attend a funeral or memorial service for such member.
( 4 ) Other persons whom the Department determines should be exempt from payment of passport fees for compelling circumstances, pursuant to guidance issued by the Department; or
( 5 ) Other categories of persons exempted by law.
[72 FR 74173, Dec. 31, 2007]
### §6913. Resource Recovery and Conservation Panels

The Administrator shall provide teams of personnel, including Federal, State, and local employees or contractors (hereinafter referred to as "Resource Conservation and Recovery Panels") to provide Federal agencies, States and local governments upon request with technical assistance on solid waste management, resource recovery, and resource conservation. Such teams shall include technical, marketing, financial, and institutional specialists, and the services of such teams shall be provided without charge to States or local governments.

(Pub. L. 89–272, title II, §2003, as added Pub. L. 94–580, §2, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2804; amended Pub. L. 95–609, §7(e), Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3081.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1978—Pub. L. 95–609 inserted "Federal agencies," after "to provide".

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of certain enforcement functions of Administrator or other official of Environmental Protection Agency under this chapter to Federal Inspector, Office of Federal Inspector for the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System, and subsequent transfer to Secretary of Energy, then to Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects, see note set out under section 6903 of this title.
Exhibit 21. List of Subsidiaries     Name of Subsidiary Ownership CCI Southeast, LLC (“CCISE”)  100.00%Riverdale Carwash Lot 3A, LLC (“Riverdale”)  100.00%AARD-Cypress Sound, LLC (“Cypress Sound’)  51.00%AARD-TSD-CSK Firestone, LLC (“Firestone”)  51.00%South Glen Eagles Drive, LLC (“West Valley”)  51.00%119th and Ridgeview, LLC (“Ridgeview”)  51.00%53rd and Baseline, LLC (“Baseline”)  51.00%Hwy 278 and Hwy 170, LLC (“Bluffton”)  51.00%State and 130th, LLC (“American Fork”)  51.00%Clinton Keith and Hidden Springs, LLC (“Murietta”)  51.00%Hwy 46 and Bluffton Pkwy, LLC (“Bluffton 46”)  51.00%AARD Bader Family Dollar Flat Shoals, LLC (“Flat Shoals”)  51.00%AARD Westminster OP7, LLC (“Westminster OP7”)  51.00%Eagle Palm I, LLC (“Eagle”)  51.00%AARD Econo Lube Stonegate, LLC (“Econo Lube”)  51.00%AARD Bader Family Dollar MLK, LLC (“MLK”)  51.00%AARD-Charmar Greeley, LLC (“Starbucks”)  51.00%AARD-Charmar Greeley Firestone, LLC  51.00%AARD 5020 Lloyd Expy, LLC (“Evansville”)  51.00%AARD ‘2245 Main Street, LLC (“Plainfield”)  51.00%AARD-Buckeye, LLC (“Buckeye”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 1, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 1”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 2, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 2”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 3, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 3”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 4, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 4”)  51.00%AARD MDJ Goddard, LLC (“Goddard”)  51.00%AARD Charmar Arlington Boston Pizza, LLC (“Charmar Boston Pizza”)  51.00%L-S Corona Pointe, LLC (“L-S Corona”)  50.01%
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Calvin Coolidge Staples, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered December 4, 1974, upon resentence, convicting him of criminally negligent homicide, assault in the third degree, operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and violating subdivision 1 of section 1192 and section 1121 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed as to the conviction; judgment reversed as to the sentence, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and case remanded to the County Court for resentencing in accordance herewith. Defendant’s guilt was established beyond a reasonable doubt and the sentences imposed were not excessive as a matter of law. However, the sentencing minutes indicate that the court, in imposing the maximum terms, took cognizance of the fact that the defendant had underrated his drinking problem and was not willing to seek help for it. Noting that the defendant, if not incarcerated, would pose a threat on the highways the court imposed the present sentences. However, the defendant has been free on bail since the middle of December, 1974 and has not, since the accident, driven a vehicle. Horeover, he contends that, on his own initiative, he has stopped drinking and that he is thus fully rehabilitated. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the case should be remanded for resentencing in the light of the above, and upon the submission of an updated presentence report by the probation department. Hartuscello, J. P., Latham, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.