alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

602 

CA 14-01889 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

CHARLES M. ALBERT, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

KATHLEEN A. MACHOLS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

 

OSBORN, REED & BURKE, LLP, ROCHESTER (MICHAEL A. REDDY OF COUNSEL),

FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

LAW OFFICE OF FRANK G. MONTEMALO, PLLC, ROCHESTER (FRANK G. MONTEMALO

OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Ann

Marie Taddeo, J.), entered June 24, 2014 in a personal injury action. 

The order denied the motion of defendant for summary judgment

dismissing the complaint. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted,

and the complaint is dismissed.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for

injuries he sustained when the vehicle he was operating collided headon with a vehicle operated by defendant. Supreme Court erred in

denying defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the

complaint. Defendant met her initial burden by establishing as a

matter of law that the emergency doctrine applied (see generally

Caristo v Sanzone, 96 NY2d 172, 174), i.e., she established that she

was operating her vehicle in a lawful and prudent manner when

plaintiff’s vehicle suddenly and without warning crossed into her lane

of travel, and there was nothing she could have done to avoid the

collision (see Hill v Cash, 117 AD3d 1423, 1426; Wasson v Szafarski, 6

AD3d 1182, 1183). “Although ‘it generally remains a question for the

trier of fact to determine whether an emergency existed and, if so,

whether the [driver’s] response was reasonable’ . . . , we conclude

that summary judgment is appropriate here because defendant[]

presented ‘sufficient evidence to establish the reasonableness of

[her] actions [in an emergency situation] and there is no opposing

evidentiary showing sufficient to raise a legitimate question of 

fact’ ” (Shanahan v Mackowiak, 111 AD3d 1328, 1329-1330). 

Entered: June 12, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
Docket No: FAA - 2015 - 4210 Dir ID: 2015 - NM - 067 - AD
#### § 21.650 DoD Components.

The Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Defense Agencies, and DoD Field Activities.
1233.103 Protests to the agency. ( c ) DOT Operating Administrations (OAs) shall consider the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in all agency protest actions.
#### Sisters of St. Joseph, Respondent, v City of New York et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

In an action to declare that certain real estate tax assessments levied by defendants against plaintiff’s property are null and void, defendants appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County dated April 6, 1978, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, denied their cross motion for *886summary judgment and declared that the real estate taxes assessed and levied upon plaintiff’s property for the years 1975-1976 through 1977-1978 are illegal and that the liens imposed thereby should be canceled of record. Order and judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The Tax Commission’s determination that the organizations involved with the property "are all religious and charitable organizations as contemplated by Section 421 (l)(a) of the Real Property Tax Law [and] that the property in question is being used for carrying out thereupon such religious and charitable purposes”, rules out the applicability of subdivision 2 of section 421 of the Real Property Tax Law. Subdivision 2 comes into play only "If any portion of such real property is *not*so used exclusively to carry out thereupon one or more of such purposes but is leased or otherwise used for *other purposes”*(emphasis supplied). The word "leased” is qualified by "for other purposes”, which the Tax Commission itself said was not the case here. Subdivision 2 of section 421 of the Real Property Tax Law is, therefore, not applicable. Latham, J. P., Rabin, Cohalan and Hargett, JJ., concur.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22
- 12 6 6
In re: SANDRA DENISE CURL, a/k/a Sandra Curl

- Jacobs El, a/k/a Sandra Curl Jacobs, a/k/a Minister Sandra El; In re: PERCY LEROY JACOBS, a/k/a Percy El Jacobs, a/k/a Percy Jacobs El, a/k/a Minister Percy El Jacobs , Petitioners

.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

. ( 8:19

- cr - 00444

- GJH

- 1 ; 8:19

- cr - 00444

- GJH

- 2 )

Submitted : March 22, 2022 Decided: March 23, 2022

Before WILKINSON, KING, and RUSHING , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Sandra Denise Curl , Percy Leroy Jacobs , Petitioners Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-1266 Doc: 12 Filed: 03/23/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Sandra Denise Curl and Percy Leroy Jacobs petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to dismiss the indictment against them. We deny the petition

. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordin ary circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. , 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy

- Brown,
LLC , 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other ade quate means to attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy

- Brown , 907 F.3d at 795 ( cleaned up ). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp. , 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). If Petitioners are convicted, they may cha llenge on appeal the orders at issue in this petition. Accordingly, t he relief sought by Petitioners is not available by way of mandamus , so we deny the petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED USCA4 Appeal: 22-1266 Doc: 12 Filed: 03/23/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
Qualified Zone Academy Bonds: Allocations for

 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004

State

2001 2002 2003 2004

Alabama 7,641 7,683 7,975 7,004

Alaska 545 634 619 613

Arizona 6,640 7,061 8,914 8,044

Arkansas 4,343 5,589 5,408 5,822

California 52,969 53,149 49,511 50,399

Colorado 3,899 4,105 4,388 4,772

Connecticut 2,699 2,621 2,853 3,054

Delaware 908 862 607 799

District of Columbia 896 898 1,157 1,062

Florida 21,699 19,196 23,799 22,524

Georgia 11,635 10,400 12,249 10,277

Hawaii 1,496 1,376 1,581 1,510

Idaho 2,015 1,927 1,730 1,609

Illinois 13,905 16,827 14,311 17,445

Indiana 4,611 6,032 5,855 6,041

Iowa 2,492 2,465 2,429 2,922

Kansas 3,750 3,004 3,059 2,944

Kentucky 5,550 5,637 5,763 6,249

Louisiana 9,721 8,736 8,124 8,504

Maine 1,538 1,269 1,512 1,861

Maryland 4,372 4,632 4,411 4,378

Massachusetts 8,367 7,528 6,428 7,092

Michigan 11,080 11,884 10,622 12,608

Minnesota 3,982 3,411 4,136 3,557

Mississippi 5,162 4,284 6,176 5,615

Missouri 7,346 5,266 6,153 6,030

Montana 1,595 1,628 1,364 1,335

Nebraska 2,103 1,771 1,810 1,981

Nevada 2,368 2,035 1,742 2,058

New Hampshire 1,071 766 928 799

New Jersey 7,356 7,970 7,826 7,453

New Mexico 4,171 3,578 3,701 3,590

New York 29,712 29,441 30,524 29,441

North Carolina 11,961 10,903 11,607 12,750

North Dakota 954 730 985 799

Ohio 15,643 13,847 13,452 12,028

Oklahoma 4,939 6,032 5,821 5,352

Oregon 4,839 4,572 4,675 4,159

Pennsylvania 13,056 12,710 13,269 12,608

Rhode Island 1,136 1,017 1,146 1,270

South Carolina 5,265 4,787 6,909 6,216

South Dakota 654 802 710 930

Tennessee 7,557 9,814 9,189 9,182

Texas 34,818 36,059 35,853 36,795

Utah 1,406 2,537 2,727 2,495

Vermont 667 850 676 668

Virginia 6,288 6,391 6,462 7,683

Washington 6,333 7,097 7,264 7,191

West Virginia 3,285 2,968 3,334 3,207

Wisconsin 5,229 6,199 4,847 5,111

Wyoming 644 646 481 482

American Samoa 350 418 470 385

Guam 251 426 412 405

Northern Marianas 408 381 390 373

Puerto Rico 26,308 26,727 21,209 20,132

Virgin Islands 372 422 447 387

Department of the Treasury

 Office of Tax Analysis

(in thousands of dollars)

Calendar Year Funds are First Available*
[ARTICLE]    5<TABLE><S>                                                      <C>[PERIOD-TYPE]                                          6-MOS[PERIOD-START]                                   Jul-01-2000[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                                Mar-31-2001[PERIOD-END]                                     Sep-30-2000[CASH]                                               321,344[SECURITIES]                                         399,309[RECEIVABLES]                                      2,367,786[ALLOWANCES]                                          95,000[INVENTORY]                                        4,709,083[CURRENT-ASSETS]                                   8,351,385[PP&E]                                             3,044,789[DEPRECIATION]                                     2,383,811[TOTAL-ASSETS]                                    10,422,656[CURRENT-LIABILITIES]                              2,942,276[BONDS]                                                    0[PREFERRED-MANDATORY]                                      0[PREFERRED]                                                0[COMMON]                                              73,450[OTHER-SE]                                         6,863,405[TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY]                      10,422,656[SALES]                                            3,451,455[TOTAL-REVENUES]                                   3,451,455[CGS]                                              2,710,352[TOTAL-COSTS]                                      4,236,252[OTHER-EXPENSES]                                       1,099[LOSS-PROVISION]                                      25,000[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                                    68,272[INCOME-PRETAX]                                    (789,735)[INCOME-TAX]                                       (240,000)[INCOME-CONTINUING]                                (549,735)[DISCONTINUED]                                             0[EXTRAORDINARY]                                            0[CHANGES]                                                  0[NET-INCOME]                                       (549,735)[EPS-BASIC]                                           (0.14)[EPS-DILUTED]                                         (0.14)</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000318681
<NAME> ART 5. FDS FOR 1995 10-K
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S.DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1,000
<CASH>                                          66,040
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  205,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               271,088
<PP&E>                                      24,098,861
<DEPRECIATION>                            (21,140,558)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,229,391
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           64,157
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,139,137
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,229,391
<SALES>                                        934,105
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               934,105
<CGS>                                        1,387,068
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,387,068
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               184,246
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (637,209)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (637,209)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (637,209)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (615)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (615)
        

</TABLE>
### §456. Rules and regulations; appointment, removal, and compensation of employees; expenditures; authorization of appropriations

The Secretary of Agriculture may make such rules and regulations as may be deemed advisable to carry out the provisions of this chapter and may cooperate with any department or agency of the Government, any State, Territory, District, or possession, or department, agency, or political subdivision thereof, or any person; and may call upon any other Federal department, board, or commission for assistance in carrying out the purposes of this chapter; and shall have the power to appoint, remove, and fix the compensation of such officers and employees not in conflict with existing law and make such expenditure for rent, outside the District of Columbia, printing, telegrams, telephones, books of reference, books of law, periodicals, newspapers, furniture, stationery, office equipment, travel, and other supplies and expenses as shall be necessary to the administration of this chapter in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, and there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, such sums as may be necessary after the fiscal year 1927, for carrying out the purposes of this chapter.

(July 2, 1926, ch. 725, §6, 44 Stat. 803.)

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

#### Transfer to Secretary of Agriculture

Transfer of Division of Cooperative Marketing "(by whatever name now called)" from Farm Credit Administration to Secretary of Agriculture, by act Aug. 6, 1953, ch. 335, §9, 67 Stat. 394, see note set out under section 452 of this title.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Farmer Cooperative Service in Department of Agriculture as successor to functions of Cooperative Research and Service Division, Farm Credit Administration, see note set out under section 452 of this title.

For prior transfers of functions, see notes set out under section 452 of this title.

#### Exceptions From Transfer of Functions

Functions of Corporations of Department of Agriculture, boards of directors and officers of such corporations; Advisory Board of Commodity Credit Corporation; and Farm Credit Administration or any agency, officer, or entity of, under, or subject to supervision of said Administration excepted from functions of officers, agencies, and employees transferred to Secretary of Agriculture by 1953 Reorg. Plan No. 2, §1, eff. June 4, 1953, 18 F.R. 3219, 67 Stat. 633, set out as a note under section 2201 of this title.
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Peter Pepe

*Ernest J. Diette, Jr.,*assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).

*Alan E. Silver,*for the appellant (defendant).

Argued February 4

decided February 4, 1975

The plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in New Haven County is granted unless the defendant files his assignment of errors on or before February 11, 1975.
#### § 865.126 Sample report format.

Summary of Statistics for Air Force Discharge Review Board

RCS: DD-M(SA) 1489

[FY \_\_\_ ]

[ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ ]

| | Record review | | Hearing | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Applied | Number approved | Applied | Number approved | Applied | Number approved |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Part 1 Regular Cases. | | | | | | |
| Part 2 Other. | | | | | | |
| Part 3 Total. | | | | | | |
| Part 4 Cases Outstanding. | | | | | | |
| **Note:** Identify numbers separately for regional DRB hearings. Use of additional footnotes to clarify or amplify the statistic being reported is encouraged. | | | | | | |
FY 2017 AGENCY FINANCIAL REPORT | U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 127

Table 6.

CIVIL MONETARY PENALTY ADJUSTMENT FOR INFLATION

The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended, requires agencies to make regular and consistent 

inflationary adjustments of civil monetary penalties to maintain their deterrent effect. To improve compliance with the 

act, and in response to multiple audits and recommendations, agencies should report annually in the Other Information 

section the most recent inflationary adjustments to civil monetary penalties to ensure penalty adjustments are both timely 

and accurate.

Location for Penalty Update Details:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/04/20/2017-08034/adjustment-of-civil-monetary-penalties-for-inflation

Penalty Authority Date of Previous 

Adjustment

Date of Current 

Adjustment

Current Penalty 

Level

Failure to provide information for cost of higher education 20 USC 

1015(c)(5) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $36,849 

Failure to provide information regarding teacherpreparation programs20 USC 

1022d(a)(3) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $30,694 

Violation of Title IV of the HEA 20 USC 1082(g) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $54,789 

Violation of Title IV of the HEA 20 USC 

1094(c)(3)(B) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $54,789 

Failure to disclose information to minor children and parents 20 USC 

1228c(c)(2)(E) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $1,617 

Improper lobbying for government grants and contracts 31 USC 

1352(c)(1) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $19,246 to $192,459

False claims and statements 31 USC 3802(a)(1) 1-Aug-16 20-Apr-17 $10,957
### §§232 to 237. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Sections 232 to 236, act Dec. 28, 1945, ch. 591, §§1–5, 59 Stat. 659, relating to admission of alien spouses and minor children of World War II veterans, omitted as expired three years after Dec. 28, 1945.

Section 237, act Dec. 28, 1945, ch. 591, §6, added July 22, 1947, ch. 289, 61 Stat. 401.
#### § 750.62 Statutory authority.

Section 2737 of title 10, United States Code, provides authority for the administrative settlement in an amount not to exceed $1,000.00 of any claim against the United States not cognizable under any other provision of law for damage, loss, or destruction of property or for personal injury or death caused by military personnel or a civilian official or employee of a military department incident to the use of a vehicle of the United States at any place, or any other property of the United States on a Government installation. There is no right to sue. There are no territorial limitations and the Act has worldwide application.
Exhibit 32.1

BULOVA TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC. AND CONSOLIDATED AFFILIATE

Certification Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report
of Bulova Technologies Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John D. Stanton, Principal Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ John D. StantonJohn D. StantonPrincipal Executive OfficerMarch 31, 2010




33
#### WATSON, Respondent, v. WATSON, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

December 1, 1903.)

Action by John H. Watson against Elsie M. Watson.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Michael Schumacher, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Federal Mortgage
Corporation of Puerto Rico, Inc.

     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

          a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

          b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date.

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

          a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

          b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and

     6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:  November 9, 2005


 /s/ Michael Schumacher
Michael Schumacher
Treasurer, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer