alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, Respondent, v. Assessors of the City of Binghamton et al., Appellants.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Broome County, denying appellants’ motion to dismiss respondent’s petition in a proceeding under article 13 of the Tax Law for failing to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The respondent’s petition seeks review of the assessment placed upon its real property in the City of Binghamton. The petition sets forth that the respondent duly appeared before the appellants by its authorized agent, made application for a correction of its assessment, duly filed a verified protest which was received without objection and that a hearing was held thereon with appellants refusing to reduce the amount of the assessment. The protest, a copy of which was attached to the petition, was signed “ The Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company by Albert L. Merriam, District Land & Tax *853Agent,” and in his verification thereof Merriam swore that he was the District Land and Tax Agent of the corporation making the complaint, that he signed it as such and was authorized to do so. The appellants moved to dismiss the petition for failing to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action on the ground that it failed to show compliance by the respondent with certain provisions of Local Law No. 1 of the Local Laws of 1943 of the City of Binghamton which provides in part that complaints must be made by the person assessed or whose property is assessed and that: “2. * * * If such statement is made by a person other than the person assessed or whose property is assessed, there must be submitted to the assessor and board of review a written power of attorney, duly acknowledged, showing the authorization of the person therein designated to make such statement.” The court denied the motion. The appellants seek to place an overly technical interpretation on the provisions of section 2 of the Local Law No. 1 and it is the well-established rule that such enactments should be given a liberal interpretation in favor of the taxpayer so as not to defeat his right to have his assessment reviewed. Section 37 of the General Construction Law provides that, *“*The term person includes a corporation”. Of course, a corporation such as respondent can only act through its officers and agents so it would seem that a complaint or protest signed, as here, in the name of the corporation by one of its officers or agents is the equivalent of one signed by the person whose property is assessed. Further, this court has previously held that the provision involved here is *“*a procedural provision designed to prevent unauthorized appearances ” *(Matter of McLean’s Stores*v. *Commissioner of Assessment,*2 A D 2d 98, 100). A procedural as opposed to a jurisdictional defect may be waived and by receiving and hearing the protest on the merits without objection the appellants waived the alleged defect of which they now complain (cf. *People ex rel. Irving Trust Co.*v. *Miller,*264 App. Div. 270). Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                      24,162,024
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               33,506,747
<ALLOWANCES>                                   250,950
<INVENTORY>                                 12,107,738
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            75,029,252
<PP&E>                                      44,102,680
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,676,956
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             109,178,509
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,292,695
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,667
<OTHER-SE>                                  86,180,853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               109,178,509
<SALES>                                    104,845,697
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           104,845,697
<CGS>                                       40,131,308
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               397,740
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             18,229,259
<INCOME-TAX>                                 5,468,778
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         12,760,481
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                12,760,481
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .79
        

</TABLE>
#### FISK et al. v. FISK et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 16, 1903.)

Action by Almira G. Fisk and another against Fisk, Clark & Flagg.

No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.
October 15, 2015

Mr. Richard Gage

Allen Associates Inc.

7114 East Earl l Drive

Scottsdale, AZ 85251

Dear Mr. Gage :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We received your June 17, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Allen Associates Inc. filed in

D ocket No

. FAA− 20 15

− 3173 , but we are unable to process your request any further. Your

petition does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider

the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemptio n.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html . This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal

Aviation A dministration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any

questions you may have.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267

- 2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Div ision

Enclosure s34
##### 



EXHIBIT 21
 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF
CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATION
  State ofDomicilePARENT COMPANYSUBSIDIARYCapstead Mortgage Corporation (CMC)
    
    MarylandCapstead Capital Corporation
    
    DelawareCapstead Inc.(1)
    
    DelawareCapstead Mortgage Trust I (2)
    
    DelawareCapstead Mortgage Trust II (2)
    
    DelawareCapstead Mortgage Trust III (2)
    
    DelawareCMC Securities Holding, LLC
    
    DelawareCapstead Securities Corporation IV
    
    DelawareCMC Real Estate Capital GP, LLC
    
    DelawareCMC Real Estate Capital, L.P.(3)
    
    DelawareCMC Securities Corporation III
    
    DelawareCMC Securities Corporation IV
    
    Delaware
 
 (1)
    
    CMC owns all of the issued and outstanding preferred stock representing 98.5% of Capstead
Inc.(2)
    
    CMC owns 100% of the common securities of these unconsolidated statutory trusts formed to
issue preferred securities to unrelated third party investors.(3)
    
    CMC owns 99.9% of CMC Real Estate Capital, L.P. with the remainder held by CMC Real Estate
Capital GP, LLC.
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Herzle Bodinger, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of RADA Electronic Industries
Ltd.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13(a)-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
Subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) [Reserved]

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual
report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date:  March 29, 2007
/s/ Herzle Bodinger *
---------------------
Herzle Bodinger
Chief Executive Officer

     * The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at
the Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                               1,565
<SECURITIES>                                         9,250
<RECEIVABLES>                                        1,413
<ALLOWANCES>                                          (387)
<INVENTORY>                                          4,529
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    17,005
<PP&E>                                              18,871
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (13,176)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      29,409
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                3,561
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                99
<OTHER-SE>                                          25,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        29,409
<SALES>                                             15,747
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    15,747
<CGS>                                                8,164
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        8,164
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     4,630
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      3,392
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (1,487)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  4,879
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         4,879
<EPS-BASIC>                                            .49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .47



</TABLE>
#### Leon K. Shanack, Appellant, v. Long Island Daily Press Publishing Company, Inc., Respondent.

Motion for reargument referred to the court that rendered the decision. Beldock, Acting P. J., Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur. Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9711 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9711

 To amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 
to direct the Congressional Budget Office to publish a schedule of the 
   availability of certain publications by the Office, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 19, 2024

 Mr. Valadao introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on the Budget

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 
to direct the Congressional Budget Office to publish a schedule of the 
   availability of certain publications by the Office, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``Congressional Budget Office 
Scheduling Reform Act''.

SEC. 2. PUBLICATION OF CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE SCHEDULE OF 
              PUBLICATIONS.

    (a) In General.--Title IV of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after section 
402 the following:

                 ``congressional budget office schedule

    ``Sec. 403.  (a) Schedule.--Not later than December 31 of each 
calendar year, the Director of the Congressional Budget Office shall 
publish, on the Office's public website, a schedule setting forth the 
expected publication dates of major recurring reports. Such schedule 
shall include at a minimum the following:
            ``(1) The baseline for the budget year and subsequent 
        updates.
            ``(2) The report on options to reduce the deficit.
            ``(3) The report on the accuracy of budgetary projections 
        for the most recently completed fiscal year.
            ``(4) The report on programs or activities with 
        unauthorized appropriations under section 202(e)(3).
    ``(b) Update.--The Director shall, as the Director deems necessary, 
update the schedule published under subsection (a) during the calendar 
year immediately following the calendar year such schedule was 
published.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 1(b) of 
such Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 402 
the following:

``Sec. 403. Congressional Budget Office schedule.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.26


 


EXECUTION
COPY


AMENDMENT TO THE


NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC.


SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN


(Amended and Restated As of June 1, 1999)


WHEREAS, New York
Stock Exchange, Inc. (succeeded effective March 7, 2006 by New York Stock
Exchange LLC, hereinafter referred to as the “Exchange”)
constituted and established the New York
Stock Exchange, Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, which plan has
been amended from time to time, and as amended and restated in its
entirety effective as of June 1, 1999 and thereafter
amended is hereinafter referred to as the “SERP”; and


 


WHEREAS, the Exchange
authorized the permanent cessation of future benefit accruals of all active
participants in the SERP to occur effective March 31, 2006; and


 


WHEREAS, the Exchange
reserved the right to amend the SERP upon the terms and conditions therein set
forth and now desires to amend the SERP.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the SERP is
amended, effective March 31, 2006, to read as follows:


 


1.             The
preface to the SERP is amended by adding the following paragraph at the end
thereof:


 

















 


The
SERP is now amended effective March 31, 2006, to freeze the future benefit accrual
of every active Participant in the Plan.  As a result, no Participant shall accrue any
additional benefits under the Plan after March 31, 2006.  In addition, effective after such
date, the Plan shall be closed to new participants and no
individual shall be eligible to commence participation in the Plan after such
date.  Subject to the foregoing freeze of
future benefit accruals, the Plan shall continue to remain in
effect and shall be administered in accordance with its terms.


2.             Article
III of the Plan is amended by adding immediately before Section 3.1 “Eligibility”
the following new Section 3.1A:


 


3.1A        No New Participants.


Notwithstanding
anything in this Plan to the
contrary, no Eligible Employee shall become a new Participant in the Plan after
March 31, 2006.


3.             Article V of the Plan is amended by
adding immediately before Section 4.1 “General”
the following new
Section 5.1A:


 


5.lA         Freeze
of Benefit Accruals for All
Participants.


Notwithstanding
any provision in this Plan to the contrary, the benefit accrual of each
Participant under the Plan shall cease effective March 31, 2006.  As a result, no
Participant shall earn any service for benefit accrual purposes after March 31,
2006 and the Compensation paid to any Participant after that date shall not be taken into account for benefit
accrual purposes under the Plan.


 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Exchange has caused this Amendment to be executed this 22nd
 day of March, 2006.


 


	
   

  	
  NEW
  YORK STOCK EXCHANGE LLC

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/
  DALE B. BERNSTEIN

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  EVP
  HR + CORP. SVCS.

  
				



 


 


ATTEST:


 


	
  /s/ MARY YEAGER

  	
   

  



 


2
September 11, 2013

Exemption No. 8852C

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2005

- 20038

Jerrod Seabaugh

Director of Quality Control

Era Helicopters, LLC

600 Airport Service Road

Lake Charles, LA 70605

Dear Mr. Seabaugh:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8852. It

explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated July 25, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on

behalf of Era Helicopters LLC (Era) for an extension of Exemption No. 8852. That exemption

from §§ 91.411(b) and 91.413(c) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows Era to perform

air traffic control (ATC) transponder tests and inspections and altimeter system and altimeter

reporting equipment tests and inspections for its 14 CFR part 135 aircraft maintained under a

continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP).

For clarification, the relief granted in Exemption No. 8852, which referenced Exemption No.

8474A, includes Era aircraft maintained in accordance with the requirements of § 135.411(a)(1)

under an Approved Aircraft Inspection Program (AAIP).

In y our petition, you indicate there has been no change in the conditions and reasons regarding

public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.2

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in

the Federal Register . The requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and

any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Era.

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8852

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has

delegated to me, I grant your petition. Please note the f ollowing conditions and limitations.

Conditions and Limitations of your Exemption

1. All ATC transponder tests and inspections and all altimeter reporting equipment tests

and inspections must be conducted under Era’s part 135 general Maintenance Manual.

2. All tests and inspections must be recorded in the aircraft’s maintenance log by the

person performing each inspection and test. This record must identify the person

perfor ming the inspection, the date of the inspection, and this exemption number.

3. All records of these tests and inspections also must be kept in Era’s maintenance

recording system for its aircraft operated under part 135.

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8852 to December 31, 2015, unless

sooner superseded or rescinded. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption

No. 8852.

Sincerely,

/s/

Michael J. Zenkovich

Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service