alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dontis Brinson, Appellant.

[835 NYS2d 313]—

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), rendered December 6, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (McKay, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Assuming that the pretrial identification of the defendant by one of the complaining witnesses resulted from a police-arranged identification procedure *(but see People v Rodriguez,*194 AD2d 634 [1993]; *People v Boyd,*161 AD2d 719 [1990]), the prosecution sustained its initial burden of demonstrating that the procedure was both reasonable and not unduly suggestive by presenting testimony that the witness came upon the scene and identified the defendant while he was being escorted to a patrol car just a few blocks away from the crime scene and only several minutes after the crime occurred *(see People v Duuvon,*77 NY2d 541 [1991]; *People v Gilyard,*32 AD3d 1046 [2006]; *People v Charles,*31 AD3d 657 [2006]; *People v Loo,*14 AD3d 716 [2005]; *cf. People v Ortiz,*90 NY2d 533 [1997]). Inasmuch as no contrary evidence was submitted, the hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress the identification testimony.

In any event, even if the identification testimony had been erroneously admitted, the error would be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt *(see People v Reuben,*215 AD2d 508 [1995]; *see*
      *873
      *generally People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230 [1975]). Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Carni and Dickerson, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
24
   PPL
CORPORATION
 
 2008
ANNUAL REPORT
 TO THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 ON FORM
10-K
  
 POWER OF
ATTORNEY
   The
undersigned directors of PPL Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation, that is to
file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C., under the
provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, its Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 ("Form 10-K Report"), do
hereby appoint each of James H. Miller, Paul A. Farr and Robert J. Grey, and
each of them, their true and lawful attorney, with power to act without the
other and with full power of substitution and resubstitution, to execute for
them and in their names the Form 10-K Report and any and all amendments thereto,
whether said amendments add to, delete from or otherwise alter the Form 10-K
Report, or add or withdraw any exhibits or schedules to be filed therewith and
any and all instruments in connection therewith.  The undersigned
hereby grant to each said attorney full power and authority to do and perform in
the name of and on behalf of the undersigned, and in any and all capacities, any
act and thing whatsoever required or necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully and to all intents and purposes as the undersigned might do,
hereby ratifying and approving the acts of each of the said
attorneys.
 
 IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their hands this 27th day of
February, 2009.
 
 
 /s/
      Frederick M. Bernthal
              
              /s/
      Stuart HeydtFrederick
      M. Bernthal
              
              Stuart
      Heydt/s/
      John W. Conway
              
              /s/
      James H. MillerJohn
      W. Conway
              
              James
      H. Miller/s/
      E. Allen Deaver
              
              /s/
      Craig A. RogersonE.
      Allen Deaver
              
              Craig
      A. Rogerson/s/
      Louise K. Goeser
              
              /s/
      W. Keith SmithLouise
      K. Goeser
              
              W.
      Keith Smith/s/
      Stuart E. Graham
              
              /s/
      Keith H. WilliamsonStuart
      E. Graham
              
              Keith
      H. Williamson
|              |
|--------------|
|    |
§ 1806.1 Scope and purpose. ( a ) This part sets forth the authority of NACIC personnel to accept service of process on behalf of the NACIC or any NACIC employee.
( b ) This part is intended to ensure the orderly execution of the NACIC's affairs and not to impede any legal proceeding.
( c ) NACIC regulations concerning employee responses to demands for production of official information before federal, state or local government entities are set out in part 1805 of this chapter.
### §425. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 425 was editorially reclassified as section 2122 of this title.
#### § 935.30 General.

In addition to any act made criminal in this part, any act committed on Wake Island that would be criminal if committed on board a merchant vessel or other vessel belonging to the United States is a criminal offense and shall be adjudged and punished according to the laws applicable on board those vessels on the high seas.
#### § 935.67 Clerk of the Court of Appeals.

There is a Clerk of the Court of Appeals, who is appointed by the Chief Judge. The Clerk serves at the pleasure of the Chief Judge. The Clerk maintains a public docket containing such information as the Chief Judge may prescribe, administers oaths, and performs such other duties as the Court directs. The Clerk is an officer of the Court.
### §367. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was from act July 28, 1953, ch. 251, title I, 67 Stat. 207, the Department of Agriculture Appropriation Act, 1954, and authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to prescribe the form of the annual financial statement required from the agricultural experiment stations. See section 361e of this title. Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:

July 5, 1952, ch. 574, title I, 66 Stat. 337.

Aug. 31, 1951, ch. 374, title I, 65 Stat. 228.

Sept. 6, 1950, ch. 896, ch. VI, title I, 64 Stat. 660.

June 29, 1949, ch. 280, title I, 63 Stat. 330.

June 19, 1948, ch. 543, title I, 62 Stat. 514.

July 30, 1947, ch. 356, title I, 61 Stat. 530.

June 22, 1946, ch. 445, 60 Stat. 277.

May 5, 1945, ch. 109, 59 Stat. 143.

June 28, 1944, ch. 296, 58 Stat. 432.

July 12, 1943, ch. 215, 57 Stat. 400.

July 22, 1942, ch. 516, 56 Stat. 670.

July 1, 1941, ch. 267, 55 Stat. 412.

June 25, 1940, ch. 421, 54 Stat. 536.

June 30, 1939, ch. 253, title I, 53 Stat. 944.

June 16, 1938, ch. 464, title I, 52 Stat. 715.

June 29, 1937, ch. 404, 50 Stat. 399.

June 4, 1936, ch. 489, 49 Stat. 1425.

May 17, 1935, ch. 131, title I, 49 Stat. 251.

Mar. 26, 1934, ch. 89, 48 Stat. 471.

Mar. 3, 1933, ch. 203, 47 Stat. 1435.

July 7, 1932, ch. 443, 47 Stat. 613.

Feb. 23, 1931, ch. 278, 46 Stat. 1246.

May 27, 1930, ch. 341, 46 Stat. 396.

Feb. 16, 1929, ch. 227, 45 Stat. 1192.

May 16, 1928, ch. 572, 45 Stat. 542.

Jan. 18, 1927, ch. 39, 44 Stat. 979.

May 11, 1926, ch. 286, 44 Stat. 502.

Feb. 10, 1925, ch. 200, 43 Stat. 824.
### §2709. Termination or suspension of orders

#### (a) Authority of Secretary

The Secretary shall, whenever he finds that any order issued under this chapter, or any provisions thereof, obstructs or does not tend to effectuate the declared policy of this chapter, terminate or suspend the operation of such order or such provisions thereof.

#### (b) Referendum to terminate or suspend; eligible voters; requirements for approval; termination or suspension date

The Secretary may conduct a referendum at any time, and shall hold a referendum on request of 10 per centum or more of the number of egg producers voting in the referendum approving the order, to determine whether such producers favor the termination or suspension of the order, and he shall suspend or terminate such order six months after he determines that suspension or termination of the order is approved or favored by a majority of the egg producers voting in such referendum who, during a representative period determined by the Secretary, have been engaged in the production of commercial eggs, and who produced more than 50 per centum of the volume of eggs produced by the egg producers voting in the referendum.

#### (c) Termination or suspension not to be considered as order

The termination or suspension of any order, or any provision thereof, shall not be considered an order within the meaning of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 93–428, §10, Oct. 1, 1974, 88 Stat. 1176.)
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

MONSANTO COMPANY AND MONSANTO

TECHNOLOGY LLC,

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

v. 

LOREN DAVID, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

____________________ 

2012-1128 

______________________

 

 Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Missouri in Case No. 04-CV-0425, 

Judge Henry E. Autrey. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

MARK G. ARNOLD, Husch Blackwell, LLP, of St. Louis, 

Missouri, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. With him on the 

brief was JOSEPH C. ORLET. 

PAUL A. SORTLAND, Sortland Law Office, PLLC, of 

Minneapolis, Minnesota, argued for defendant-appellant. 
______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (LOURIE, CLEVENGER, and BRYSON, 

Circuit Judges. 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

November 15, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

 Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
### §2009j. Annual report

#### (a) In general

The Secretary, in collaboration with State, local, public, and private entities, State rural development councils, and community-based organizations, shall prepare an annual report that contains evaluations, assessments, and performance outcomes concerning the rural community advancement programs carried out under this subchapter.

#### (b) Submission

Not later than March 1 of each year, the Secretary shall—

(1) submit the report required by subsection (a) to Congress and the chief executives of the States participating in the program established under this subchapter; and

(2) make the report available to State and local participants.

(Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §381K, as added Pub. L. 104–127, title VII, §761, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1146.)
Exhibit 31.1


      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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 17, 2006


/s/ Michael Schumacher
-----------------------------------
Michael Schumacher
President, Chief Executive Officer,
 Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer



                                       11
#### Arlene Lockwood et al., Respondents, v. Carlton S. Proctor, Appellant.

In an action by plaintiff Arlene Lockwood to recover damages for personal injury sustained by her as a consequence of a fall on an unilluminated outside rear stairway, leading from a small room off the kitchen of defendant’s one-family dwelling to a flagstone walk bordering a driveway; and by her husband Charles Lock wood to recover damages for medical expenses and loss of services, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon, entered October 14, 1960 after trial, upon a jury’s verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and complaint dismissed. In our opinion, the plaintiffs failed to establish that the stairway in any way contained an actionable defect or hidden condition of peculiar danger, calling for special warning. Plaintiffs showed, neither faulty construction nor negligent maintenance (cf. *Ranftle*v. *City Athletic Club,*20 A D 2d 716; *Mulac*v. *Greentree Homes,*256 App. Div. 1107); they merely established that the female plaintiff fell in darkness on the stairway. Photographs of the stairway in evidence show no inherent condition of peculiar danger or unique hazard; they indicate that the stairway is the common, conventional type found in suburban one-family dwellings. Plaintiffs offered no proof that the stairway was built in violation of statutory requirements or of acceptable building practices, or that the injury was caused by any defective step or landing or by any foreign matter on the stairway. Moreover, as charged by the trial court, there was no statutory duty on defendant’s part to illuminate the stairway. When the residual specification of negligence is the lack of light in an area where the law imposes no duty on the defendant to supply illumination, the proof is insufficient to create a jury question *(Hirschler*v. *Briarcliff Mgt. Corp.,*275 App. Div. 422, affd. 300 N. Y. 680). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.
§ 935.52 Violations of Subpart O or P of this part. ( a ) Whoever is found guilty of a violation of subpart O or P of this part is subject to a fine of not more than $100, or imprisonment of not more than 30 days, or both.
( b ) The penalties prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section are in addition to and do not take the place of any criminal penalty otherwise applicable and currently provided by the laws of the United States.
#### § 536.153 Claims involving tortfeasors other than nonappropriated fund employees: NAFI contractors.

AAFES concessionaires and NAFI contractors, such as entertainment performers or groups, carnival operators, and fireworks displayers are considered independent contractors and claims arising from their activities should be disposed of as set forth in DA Pam 27-162, paragraph 2-15f. If a dispute arises as to the availability of liability or workers compensation insurance the claims should be referred to AAFES Dallas (see address in § 536.30(e)(4)) or the Central Insurance Fund, U.S. Army Community and Family Support Agency as applicable.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
<MULTIPLIER>                       1,000

<S>                                <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                     JUN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       NOV-30-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<CASH>                                             864
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   44,187
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,175
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0
<PP&E>                                         496,972
<DEPRECIATION>                                 260,769
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 341,250
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                        10,805
<OTHER-SE>                                          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   341,250
<SALES>                                         19,653
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               124,218
<CGS>                                           16,492
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  100,705
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,242
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,271
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,702
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,569
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,569
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.50


</TABLE>
# C2>

ssvnoisau aaiaosaad



### m 

## iyy j 

# £ feg g£ M= p Bjy @g © 03 & (§L

# OM§

,*-

—



### uio

# er---,1c£ 

# s
CO V—

o 

### h ,_, <; H r^ i/j CO p-l 1^ o in H <" e< 

### X < 

# S 00 o 

# 7? r^ f-i fN H

1 r/1 X o pa 

# 3 O u 

# oa

o C\l <N 

## Csf 00

i 

## en
LLI 

## a: 

# cog- -
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 1 of 36 PageID #:1
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 2 of 36 PageID #:2
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 3 of 36 PageID #:3
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 4 of 36 PageID #:4
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 5 of 36 PageID #:5
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 6 of 36 PageID #:6
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 7 of 36 PageID #:7
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 8 of 36 PageID #:8
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 9 of 36 PageID #:9
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 10 of 36 PageID #:10
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 11 of 36 PageID #:11
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 12 of 36 PageID #:12
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 13 of 36 PageID #:13
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 14 of 36 PageID #:14
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 15 of 36 PageID #:15
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 16 of 36 PageID #:16
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 17 of 36 PageID #:17
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 18 of 36 PageID #:18
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 19 of 36 PageID #:19
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 20 of 36 PageID #:20
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 21 of 36 PageID #:21
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 22 of 36 PageID #:22
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 23 of 36 PageID #:23
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 24 of 36 PageID #:24
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 25 of 36 PageID #:25
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 26 of 36 PageID #:26
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 27 of 36 PageID #:27
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 28 of 36 PageID #:28
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 29 of 36 PageID #:29
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 30 of 36 PageID #:30
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 31 of 36 PageID #:31
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 32 of 36 PageID #:32
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 33 of 36 PageID #:33
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 34 of 36 PageID #:34
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 35 of 36 PageID #:35
Case: 1:12-cv-00446 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/20/12 Page 36 of 36 PageID #:36
### §2279e. Civil penalty

#### (a) In general

Any person that causes harm to, or interferes with, an animal used for the purposes of official inspections by the Department of Agriculture or the Department of Homeland Security, may, after notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record, be assessed a civil penalty by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of Homeland Security not to exceed $10,000.

#### (b) Factors in determining civil penalty

In determining the amount of a civil penalty, the Secretary concerned shall take into account the nature, circumstance, extent, and gravity of the offense.

#### (c) Settlement of civil penalties

The Secretary concerned may compromise, modify, or remit, with or without conditions, any civil penalty that may be assessed under this section.

#### (d) Finality of orders

#### (1) In general

The order of the Secretary concerned assessing a civil penalty shall be treated as a final order reviewable under chapter 158 of title 28. The validity of the order of the Secretary concerned may not be reviewed in an action to collect the civil penalty.

#### (2) Interest

Any civil penalty not paid in full when due under an order assessing the civil penalty shall thereafter accrue interest until paid at the rate of interest applicable to civil judgments of the courts of the United States.

#### (e) Secretary concerned defined

In this section and section 2279f of this title, the term "Secretary concerned" means—

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to an animal used for purposes of official inspections by the Department of Agriculture; and

(2) the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to an animal used for purposes of official inspections by the Department of Homeland Security.

(Pub. L. 106–224, title V, §501, June 20, 2000, 114 Stat. 455; Pub. L. 107–296, title IV, §421(h), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2184.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–296, §421(h)(1), inserted "or the Department of Homeland Security" after "Department of Agriculture" and "or the Secretary of Homeland Security" after "Secretary of Agriculture".

Subsecs. (b) to (d)(1). Pub. L. 107–296, §421(h)(2), substituted "Secretary concerned" for "Secretary" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 107–296, §421(h)(3), added subsec. (e).

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

#### Effective Date of 2002 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–296 effective 60 days after Nov. 25, 2002, see section 4 of Pub. L. 107–296, set out as an Effective Date note under section 101 of Title 6, Domestic Security.