alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The State ex rel. Rice, Appellant, *v.*J.P. Industries, Inc.; Industrial Commission of Ohio, Appellee.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Rice v. J.P. Industries,. Inc.*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 546.]

(No. 98-489

Submitted September 15, 1998

Decided November 10, 1998.)

*547
      *Barkan & Neff, L.P.A.,*and *Robert E. DeRose,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Mark S. Barnes,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Douglas, J., dissents.
4.302 Policy.

(a) Section 3(a) of E.O. 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation

Management, directs agencies to implement waste prevention. In addition, section 2(e) of E.O.

13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, directs agencies

to eliminate waste. Electronic commerce methods (see 4.502) and double-sided printing and copying

are best practices for waste prevention.

(b) When electronic commerce methods (see 4.502) are not used, agencies shall require contractors

to submit paper documents to the Government relating to an acquisition printed or copied doublesided on at least 30 percent postconsumer fiber paper whenever practicable. If the contractor

cannot print or copy double-sided, it shall print or copy single-sided on at least 30 percent

postconsumer fiber paper.

Parent topic: Subpart 4.3 - Paper Documents
§ 3565.208 Maximum loan term. ( a ) *Statutory term limit.* The lender may set the term of the loan, but in no instance may the term of a guaranteed loan exceed the lesser of 40 years or the remaining economic life of the project.
( b ) *Prepayment of loans.* A guaranteed loan may be prepaid in whole or in part at the determination of the lender, and upon the lender's written notice to the Agency at least 30 days prior to the expected date of prepayment. The Agency will not pay any lockout or prepayment penalty assessed by the lender. The lender must certify the following in the notice of prepayment: ( 1 ) The lease documents used by the borrower or its agent prohibit the abrogation of tenant leases in the event of prepayment; and
( 2 ) The borrower has notified tenants of the request to prepay the loan, including notice of the prohibition against abrogation of the lease and the policy and procedure for handling complaints regarding compliance with the long-term use restriction as contained in subpart H of this part.
Theodore D. Schade Air Pollution Control Officer



## GREAT BASIN 

## UNIFIED AIRPOLLUTION CONTROL 

## DISTRICT 157ShortStreet, Bishop, California 93514-3537 760-872-8211 Fax: 760-872-6109

June lO,20 10 Ms. Deborah Jordan, Director Air Division US Environmental Protection Agency, AIR-1 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, California 94105 

### RE: Coso Junction PMlO Contingency Measures Dear Ms. Jordan:
I understand that your staff would like clarification on the District's commitment to implement contingency measures in the Coso Junction Planning Area (CJPA) in the event that a violation ofthe PM 10 standard occurs. As discussed in the 20 10PM 10Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction Planning Area (adopted May 17,201 O), the district committed to investigate the cause of any exceedance ofthe PMlO standard within 60 days following the end of the quarter during which the event occurred. It should be noted that the District has committed to investigate all exceedances ofthe PM10 standard, and not just those events that trigger a PMlO standard violation (e.g. 4thexceedance within 

### 3 years). Implementation of contingency measures is likewise triggered by any exceedance ofthe standard and not necessarily a violation of the standard. There are three different types ofPM10 sources that might cause exceedances of the PM10 standard at Coso Junction; windblown dust from the Owens Valley Planning Area, dust from local sources (e.g. windblown dust), and natural sources (e.g. wildfires). Wehave monitored PM10 violations due to all of these sources at Coso Junction. Contingency measures for each of these categories of PMlO sources are as follows:
Exceedances found to be caused by dust from Owens Lake will be investigated to determine if the required control measures were properly implemented in accordance with Board Order #080128-01, or if the source of PMlO is from an area not previously identified for control. This includes all exceedances measured in the Coso Junction and Owens Valley planning areas. The Board Order includes a contingency plan for additional dust controls at Owens Lake to control windblown dust generated from the lake bed. The contingency measures include deadlines for implementing dust controls depending on which Best Available Control Measure is selected to control the dust source area.Exceedances found to be caused by dust from local sources that are subject to current District regulations (See Table 

### 5 of CJPA Maintenance Plan) will be addressed and corrected. The District will commit to ordering that corrective actions be taken within 18 months of our identifying the cause ofthe exceedance.
Exceedances found to be caused by Exceptional Events, such as wildfires or earthquakes will be flagged in accordance with US EPA policy.


### I hope this clarifies the District's commitment to implement contingency measures in the Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area. Please call me or Duane Ono at (760) 872-821 1if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely,

Theodore D. Schade Air Pollution Control Officer
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

The State of Texas, Appellant

No. 06-13-00118-CR v.

Jorge Louis Verde, Appellee

Appeal from the 336th District Court of 

Fannin County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. CR-12-

24362). Memorandum Opinion delivered 

by Chief Justice Morriss, Justice Carter and 

Justice Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We further order that the appellant, The State of Texas, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED APRIL 23, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

BRIAN MARKEITH GAGE,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:19cv3650-MCR-HTC

WALTER CLEMMONS,

CAPTAIN JOHN DOE,

TIMOTHY STEPHENS,

Defendants.

/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation dated October 9, 2020, ECF No. 41, which recommends that the 

Defendant Clemmons’ motion to dismiss, ECF No. 30, as adopted by Defendant 

Stephens, ECF No. 35, be granted. The parties have been given an opportunity to 

file objections. 

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any duly filed 

objections, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be 

adopted.

Case 3:19-cv-03650-MCR-HTC Document 42 Filed 11/16/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:19cv3650-MCR-HTC

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

(1)The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 41, is 

adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

(2) Defendant Clemmons’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 30, as adopted by 

Defendant Stephens, ECF No. 35, is GRANTED, for failure to exhaust.

(3)The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Sergeant Stephens.

(4)Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, ECF No. 9, is DISMISSED as there 

are no claims which remain pending against any defendant.

(5)The Clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of November 2020.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-cv-03650-MCR-HTC Document 42 Filed 11/16/20 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 31.2



CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION



I, Denise Smith, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Silver Pearl Enterprises, 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 officer and I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we 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 quarterly report is being prepared;



b) 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



c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an 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 officer 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 registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls 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: June 28, 2007















/s/ Denise Smith





Denise Smith









Chief Financial Officer
#### §§ 4279.109-4279.112 [Reserved]
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6438

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DERRICK LAMONT EVANS, a/k/a Shank, a/k/a Dechee Dan, a/k/a Big Head, a/k/a Debo , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Abingdon

. James P. Jones , District Judge. ( 1:08

- cr - 00024

- JPJ

- 1 )

Submitted : January 9, 2020 Decided: February 25, 2020

Before HARRIS and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Juval O. Scott, Federal Public Defender, Roanoke, Virginia, Brian J. Beck, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Abingdon, Virginia , fo r Appellant . Thomas T. Cullen, United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, Jennifer R. Bockhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent i n this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Derrick Lamont Evans appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for relief pursuant to Section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, 132 Stat. 5194. Evans contends , for the first time on appeal, t hat the district court erred in determining that his sentence was imposed in accordance with the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA), Pub. L. No. 111

- 220, 124 Stat. 2372, because his term of supervised release exceeds the statutory maximum authorized by the FSA. Finding no plain error, we affirm. “To preserve an argument on appeal, the defendant must object on the same basis below as he contends is error on appeal.” United States v. Westbrooks , 780 F.3d 593, 595 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omi tted). “To satisfy plain error review, the defendant must establish that: (1) there is a sentencing error; (2) the error is plain; and (3) the error affects his substantial rights.” United States v. Aplicano

- Oyuela , 792 F.3d 416, 422 (4th Cir. 2015) (in ternal quotation marks omitted). We agree with the Government that, even assuming the district court erred by imposing an excessive term of supervised release, that error was not plain. See United States v. Harris , 890 F.3d 480, 491 (4th Cir. 2018) (“At a minimum, courts of appeals cannot correct an error pursuant to plain error review unless the error is clear under current law.” (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted ))

. We therefore affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argu ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
#### Sybil Shainwald et al., Appellants, v Kenneth R. Barasch, M.D., Respondent.

[814 NYS2d 157]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley L. Sklar, J.) entered January 19, 2005, in defendant’s favor after a jury trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The 81-year-old decedent suffered a suprachoroidal hemorrhage during extracapsular cataract surgery in 2000. Plaintiff alleged that defendant’s failure to discontinue aspirin prior to surgery caused or contributed to the hemorrhage, and the decision to use this method of surgery, as opposed to the alternative method of phacoemulsification, further increased the chance of pressure dropping within the eye and the likelihood of hemorrhage.

According deference to the jury’s resolution of conflicting expert testimony *(see Hill v Liford,*215 AD2d 252 [1995]), a fair interpretation of the evidence supports the findings that defendant was not negligent in failing to discontinue aspirin and in his choice of surgical procedure.

Plaintiffs counsel failed to preserve his objection to opposing counsel’s cross-examination of decedent’s treating physician regarding a prior bad act. In any event, the trial court properly permitted defense counsel to cross-examine the treating physician on the facts underlying his guilty plea to a harassment violation in connection with his unwelcome touching of and lewd comments to a nurse at the hospital *(see Spanier v New York City Tr. Auth.,*222 AD2d 219 [1995]).

*338The trial court’s charge to the jury was balanced, and we decline to set aside the verdict based on any asserted prejudice flowing therefrom. We have considered and rejected plaintiff s other arguments. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Marlow, Nardelli and Malone, JJ.
#### Giselle Henderson et al., Doing Business as Black Bear Logging Contractors, Respondents, v Pleasant Valley Sawmill & Coal Co., Inc., Appellant.

In an action to recover the agreed price for certain lumber allegedly sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendant, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated December 14,1979, which granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs in the principal sum of $19,957.48. Order reversed, with $50 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. The papers disclose the existence of issues of fact which can be resolved only upon a trial, including the issues of whether some of the lumber was sold subject to a condition precedent and if so, when, if ever, payment therefor became due under the agreement of the parties. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Titone and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D2023

- 2037

_____________________________
V UNSHEA M ANQUEIL R EIDS , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA D EPARTMENT OF R EVENUE C HILD S UPPORT P ROGRAM and A YANNA M

. F ERGUSON , Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Department of Revenue

. Garnett W. Chisenhall
, Administrative Law Judge

.

August 2, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , B ILBREY , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ.
, concur.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Vunshea Manqueil Reids, pro se , Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Sarah Prieto, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee , Department of Revenue

.
§ 3565.206 Ineligible uses of loan proceeds. Loan proceeds must not be used for the following: ( a ) Specialized equipment for training and therapy;
( b ) Housing in military impact areas;
( c ) Housing that serves primarily temporary and transient residents;
( d ) Nursing homes, special care facilities and institutional type homes that require licensing as a medical care facility;
( e ) Operating capital for central dining facilities or for any items not affixed to the real estate, such as special portable equipment, furnishings, kitchen ware, dining ware, eating utensils, movable tables and chairs, etc.;
( f ) Payment of fees, salaries and commissions or compensation to borrowers (except developers' fees); or
( g ) Refinancing of an outstanding debt, except in the case of an existing guaranteed loan where the Agency determines that the refinancing is in the government's interest or furthers the objectives of the program. The term and amount of any loan for refinancing must not exceed the maximum loan amount or term limits.
EXHIBIT 32

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of BlackRock Kelso Capital Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), James R. Maher, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Frank D. Gordon, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/ James R. Maher            
|Name: James R. Maher          
|Title: Chief Executive Officer
|Date: August 5, 2010          
|                              
|/s/ Frank D. Gordon           
|Name: Frank D. Gordon         
|Title: Chief Financial Officer
|Date: August 5, 2010
ZQ 1^ Sc p1 8PM 2 : 1.^ Lawrence M. Ziemba Ececutive Vice President Refining, Projects & Procurement Phillips 66 3010 Briarpark Drrive, PWC-09-9120 Houston, TX 77042 phone 832.765.6469 fax 918.977.8041 

# a

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL EX- ,tT,^T September 13, 2013
The Honorable Gina McCarthy Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20460 Re: Petition for Partial Waiver of 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard Dear Administrator McCarthy: Phillips 66 Company respectfully submits this petition to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requesting a partial waiver of the applicable 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard volumes. Under the provisions of the Clean Air Act (subsection 211(o)(7)), the Administrator may waive the RFS requirements in whole or in part on petition by any person subject to the requirements. Phillips 66 Company is an obligated party under the provisions of the Renewable Fuel Standard regulations (40 CFR Part 80, Subpart M) and is therefore subject to the requirements of the program. Phillips 66 Company is also a member of both the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM). API and AFPM recently filed a joint petition requesting a partial waiver of the 2014 RFS volumes. Existing EPA administrative and judicial precedent makes clear that both API and AFPM have standing to file an RFS waiver petition. Notwithstanding, Phillips 66 Company's submittal incorporates by reference the RFS waiver petition filed jointly by API and AFPM on August 13, 2013. Absent waiver action from the EPA, the RFS will result in inadequate domestic supplies of gasoline and diesel fuel and severe economic harm to consumers and the economy. Phillips 66 Company urges the EPA to grant the waiver as petitioned jointly by API and AFPM. Respectfully submitted,

LMZ:salI F!]:f/I^I^111'//!11^



# ^ PHILLIPS


# • •

Phillips66 

## 7001 0320 0003 1634 9625 3010 Briarpark Drive 9th Floor Pinnacle Houston, TX 77042

RECEIVED sEP 1 5 2011



# P A Mal1 Ro ute E M^GarthY,C''^na N°R.1 N 

## Mailstop 1Ap1PA 

# ^^^^1^^1111^MM11111^^t^11^1^I1^1^1^
Exhibit 32
 Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:  May 10, 2010
    /s/ Kevin CummingsKevin CummingsPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)Date:  May 10, 2010
    /s/ Thomas F. Splaine, Jr.Thomas F. Splaine, Jr.Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
----

Exhibit 32.1

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

            In connection with the Quarterly Report of Amalgamated Pictures Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Avery Pack, President, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 result of operations of the Company.

Date: November 18, 2012

| /s/ Avery Pack                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
| Avery Pack, President and          Chief Executive Officer          (Principal Executive Officer) and          Acting Chief Financial Officer          (Principal Financial Officer and          Principal Accounting Officer) |
#### § 29.1078 Unstemmed.

A form of tobacco, including whole leaf and leaf scrap, from which the stems or midribs have not been removed.

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 47 FR 51721, Nov. 17, 1982, 48 FR 29671, June 28, 1983, 49 FR 16756, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]