alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Arthur Brodish, Respondent, v. Diesel Construction Co., Inc., Defendant, and Jacobson & Co., Inc., Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, defendant Jacobson & Co., Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered May 16, 1968, as is in favor of plaintiff against it, upon a jury verdict. Judgment reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, with costs, and complaint dismissed. In our opinion, plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law (cf. *Nucci*v. *Warshaw Constr. Corp.,*12 N Y 2d 16; *Holgerson*v. *South 45th St. Garage,*16 A D 2d 255; *Giardina*v. *Bricken Textile Corp.,*243 App. Div. 608; 12 NYCRR 23.3 [e]; 23.25 [a], [8]). "If defendant ought to have foreseen an accident of this kind and taken some precaution to * * * [avoid it], then so ought plaintiff to have proceeded in a manner calculated to avoid the danger ” *(Nucci*v. *Warshaw Constr. Corp., supra,*p. 19). Unlike the situation in *Kaplan*v. *48th Ave. Corp.*(267 App. Div. 272), plaintiff herein was not faced with the choice of either abandoning the reasonable course of this work or assuming the risk. He could have avoided the danger by the simple expedient of conducting himself in accordance with rule 23.25 *(supra),*which was promulgated to prevent accidents of the kind involved herein. Were we not dismissing the complaint, we would order a new trial on the ground that the trial court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying appellant’s application for a recess or adjournment for the purpose of affording it an opportunity to put plaintiff’s physician on the stand (cf. *Hefele v*. *City of New York,*25 A D 2d 142; *McCabe*v. *Queensboro Farm Prods.,*21 A D 2d 675; *O'Malley*v. *City*
      *786
      *of New York,*16 A D 2d 942; *Murphy*v. *City of New York,*273 App. Div. 492; *Dolan*v. *United Cas. Co.,*259 App. Div. 784; *Jarvis*v. *Stoddart,*215 App. Div. 523). Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
#### § 431.35 Applicability of certification requirements.

Section 431.36 sets forth the procedures for manufacturers to certify that electric motors comply with the applicable energy efficiency standards set forth in this subpart.
2809.503 Waiver.       The HCA is the agency head for the purpose of waiving any general rule or procedure prescribed in FAR subpart 9.5. As prescribed in FAR 9.503, the authority delegated to the HCA to waive any general rule or procedure prescribed in FAR subpart 9.5 may not be delegated below the level of the HCA.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2809.5 - Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest
EXHIBIT 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 (AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)






In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sionix Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James R. Currier, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, 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, as amended; and,




2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.




Date: February 14, 2011
By:
/s/ James R. CurrierJames R. CurrierChairman, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Executive Officer





A certification furnished pursuant to this Item will not be deemed “filed” for purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.
§ 603.690 Requirements for Federally-owned property. If DOE provides Federally-owned property to any participant for the performance of RD&D under a TIA, the contracting officer must require that participant to account for, use, and dispose of the property in accordance with: ( a ) 10 CFR 600.322, if the participant is a for-profit firm.
( b ) 10 CFR 600.232(f), if the participant is a State or local governmental organization. Note that 10 CFR 600.232(f) contains additional requirements for managing the property.
( c ) 10 CFR 600.133(a) and 600.134(f), if the participant is a nonprofit organization other than a GOCO or FFRDC (requirements for GOCOs and FFRDCs should conform with the property standards in their procurement contracts).
2449.111 Review of proposed settlements.       The Head of the Contracting Activity shall establish internal procedures to ensure the independent review of proposed termination settlements in excess of $100,000.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2449.1 - General Principles
(October 21, 1980)

#### In the Matter of Master Apartments (310 Riverside Drive), Respondent-Appellant, v Finance Administrator of the City of New York et al., Appellants-Respondents.

Determination of appeals from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on September 7, 1978, unanimously held in abeyance and the matter remanded to Justice Bowman for detailed findings in accordance with subdivision 2 of section 720 of the Real Property Tax Law. No opinion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Ross, Yesawich and Carro, JJ.
#### CABONI, Appellant, v. GOTT, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 7, 1914.)

Action by Michael Caboni against Fred A. Gott.

No opinion. Motion granted, and appeal dismissed, with costs. See, also, 149 App. Div. 440, 134 N. Y. Supp. 337.
EX-35 (a)
(logo) GMAC Mortgage

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (Item 1123)

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

DBALTO6AR5

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of GMAC Mortgage, LLC, as servicer
(the "Servicer") pursuant to the applicable servicing agreement, does hereby
certify that:

1. A review of the Servicer's activities during the period covered by the
Issuing Entity's report on Form 10-K and of the Servicer's performance under the
applicable servicing agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the applicable servicing agreement in all material
respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 6th
day of March 2007.



By: /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
Name: Anthony N. Renzi
Title: Executive Vice President



GMAC Mortgage, LLC
500 Enterprise Road
Horsham, PA 19044

www.gmacmortgage.com
#### Anthony Ciofalo, Appellant, v. William J. Van Wart et al., and Louis I. Rubenstein et al., Respondents. Lee Bosco, Jr., Appellant.

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions designating respondents Rubinstein et al. as candidates in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969 for the Party position of County Committeeman respectively in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7,th, 8th, 11th and 12th Election Districts, in the 87th and 88th Assembly Districts in the 9th Ward, City of Yonkers, petitioner and another (1) appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered June 10, 1969, which dismissed the petition, and (2) move to stay said election. Appeals dismissed, without costs, on motion of respondents Board of Elections and Kenneth J. Brown. Motion for stay denied. Beldoek, P. J., Rabin, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
§ 501.134 Issuance and effect of interpretations. ( a ) DOE may issue an interpretation after consideration of the request for interpretation and other relevant information received or obtained during the proceeding.
( b ) The interpretation will contain a written statement of the information upon which it is based and a legal analysis of and conclusions regarding the application of rulings, regulations and other precedent to the situation presented in the request.
( c ) Only those persons to whom an interpretation is specifically addressed, and other persons upon whom the DOE serves the interpretation and who are directly involved in the same transaction or act, are entitled to rely upon it. No person entitled to rely upon an interpretation shall be subject to civil or criminal penalties stated in title VII of FUA for any act taken in reliance upon the interpretation, notwithstanding that the interpretation shall thereafter be declared by judicial or other competent authority to be invalid.
( d ) DOE may at any time rescind or modify an interpretation on its own initiative. Rescission or modification shall be made by notifying persons entitled to rely on the interpretation that it is rescinded or modified. This notification will include a statement of the reasons for the rescission or modification and, in the case of a modification, a restatement of the interpretation as modified.
( e ) An interpretation is modified by a subsequent amendment to the regulations or ruling to the extent that it is inconsistent with the amended regulation or ruling.
( f ) Any person who believes he is directly affected by an interpretation issued by DOE, and who believes that he will be aggrieved by its implementation, may submit a petition for reconsideration of that interpretation to the General Counsel. DOE will acknowledge receipt of all requests for reconsideration; however, this acknowledgement in no way binds DOE to commence any proceeding on the request. If within sixty (60) days of DOE's acknowledgement of the receipt of a request for reconsideration, DOE has not issued either a notice of intent to commence a proceeding to reconsider the interpretation or a modification, revision or rescission of the original interpretation, the request for reconsideration will be deemed denied. DOE may, in its discretion, issue a formal denial of a request for reconsideration if: ( 1 ) The request has not been filed in a timely manner, and good cause therefor has not been shown;
( 2 ) The person requesting reconsideration is not aggrieved or otherwise injured substantially by the interpretation; or
( 3 ) The request is defective because it fails to state and to present facts and legal argument that the interpretation was erroneous in fact or in law, or that it was arbitrary or capricious.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

DONNA DORSEY DAVIS, as an )

individual and derivatively )

upon behalf of I-65 )

PROPERTIES, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv766-MHT

) 

RICHARD M. DORSEY, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

 It is ORDERED that plaintiff Donna Dorsey Davis’s

motion to join Dorsey Motor Sales, Inc. as a necessary

party (doc. no. 53) is set for submission, without oral

argument, on June 25, 2007, with all briefs and

evidentiary materials due by said date.

DONE, this the 19th day of June, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 54 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### Cullet Corporation of America, Appellee, v. David Rosenberg, Appellant.

Gen. No. 41,007.

opinion filed June 24, 1940.

Isadore Kaplan, for appellant; Harry P. Brewer, of counsel; Sidney J. Sparberg, for appellee.

Opinion by

Presiding Justice Matchett.

“Not to be published in fuU.”
Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 70 Filed 05/14/2007 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.10


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of ImClone Systems Incorporated (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel
S. Lynch, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 results of operations
            of the Company.




/S/ Daniel S. Lynch
------------------------------
Daniel S. Lynch
Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2002
Docket No: FAA - 2015 - 4817 Dir ID: 2014 - NM - 115 - AD
#### § 501.10 Order of precedence.

If there is any conflict or inconsistency between the provisions of this part and any other provisions or parts of this chapter, except for general procedures which are unique to part 515 of this chapter, the provisions of this part will control respect to procedure.

[54 FR 52891, Dec. 22, 1989]
#### HUGHES v. BREAKWATER CO.

(No. 5992.)

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 19, 1914.)

Appeal from Trial Term, New York County. Action by James E. Hughes against the Breakwater Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Emanuel J. Myers, of New York City, for appellant.

Horace L. Cheyney, of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

INGRAHAM, P. J.

(dissenting). I dissent, upon the ground that the assumption of the debt of the bankrupt company by the defendant was without consideration, and the directors of the defendant had no power to assume such debt.
###### Editorial Note on Part 34

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 34 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 34.67 Records of leak testing of sealed sources and devices containing depleted uranium.

Each licensee shall maintain records of leak test results for sealed sources and for devices containing DU. The results must be stated in units of becquerels (microcuries). The licensee shall retain each record for 3 years after it is made or until the source in storage is removed.
#### § 986.2 Act.

*Act* means Public Act No. 10, 73d Congress, as amended and as reenacted and amended by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.*).
#### § 603.100 Purpose.

This part establishes uniform policies and procedures for the implementation of DOE's “other transactions” authority and for award and administration of a technology investment agreement (TIA).
#### In re FRASER et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 26, 1914.)

In the matter of Charles Fraser and others, as executors, etc., of John C. Latham, deceased.

No opinion. Decree affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
Exhibit 35.1



AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION

ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.11(a) OF THE

SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT AND

ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB



I, Paul C. Honda, do hereby
certify that I am the Vice President and Assistant Secretary of American Honda Finance Corporation, a California corporation (the
"Company"), and further certify on behalf of the Company in its capacity as servicer (the "Servicer" and "Sponsor")
under the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement") dated as of January 23, 2013 among the Servicer and Sponsor,
American Honda Receivables LLC, as Seller, and Honda Auto Receivables 2013-1 Owner Trust, as follows:



| | (i) | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the reporting period ended March 31, 2013, and of its performance under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | To the best of my knowledge and information, based upon such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period in all material respects.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
this 31stday of May, 2013.



| | /s/ Paul C. Honda                                    | 
| | ---------------------------------------------------- | 
| | Paul C. Honda                                        | 
| | Vice President and Assistant Secretary               | 
| | (senior officer in charge of the servicing function)
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 79 FR 75740, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 40.9 Completeness and accuracy of information. ( a ) Information provided to the Commission by an applicant for a license or by a licensee or information required by statute or by the Commission's regulations, orders, or license conditions to be maintained by the applicant or the licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.
( b ) Each applicant or licensee shall notify the Commission of information identified by the applicant or licensee as having for the regulated activity a significant implication for public health and safety or common defense and security. An applicant or licensee violates this paragraph only if the applicant or licensee fails to notify the Commission of information that the applicant or licensee has identified as having a significant implication for public health and safety or common defense and security. Notification shall be provided to the Administrator of the appropriate Regional Office within two working days of identifying the information. This requirement is not applicable to information which is already required to be provided to the Commission by other reporting or undating requirements.
[52 FR 49371, Dec. 31, 1987]
#### § 490.810 Record retention.

A State or covered person that receives a waiver under this subpart must retain documentation pertaining to its waiver application and alternative compliance, including petroleum fuel reduction by its fleet, for a period of three years following the model year for which the waiver is granted.
Home > About > Strategies, Budgets, Plans, and Reports > Strategic Plans

## Strategic Plans
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

MITCHELL JACKSON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 2D2023-0154

August 23, 2024

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Michelle Sisco, 

Judge.

Mitchell Jackson, pro se.

C. Suzanne Bechard, Associate Deputy Attorney General, Tallahassee, 

and Laura Dempsey, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, VILLANTI, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
###### Editorial Note on Part 51

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 51 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015.

#### § 51.66 Environmental report—number of copies; distribution.

Each applicant for a license or other form of permission, or an amendment to or renewal of a license or other form of permission issued under parts 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 61, 70, and/or 72 of this chapter, and covered by §§ 51.60(b)(1) through (6); or by §§ 51.61 or 51.62 shall submit to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards an environmental report or any supplement to an environmental report in the manner specified in § 51.58(a). The applicant shall maintain the capability to generate additional copies of the environmental report or any supplement to the environmental report for subsequent distribution to Federal, State, and local officials, and any affected Indian Tribes in accordance with written instructions issued by the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

[72 FR 49514, Aug. 28, 2007]
Search Help More Search Options 

Printable Version 

Residential 

Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, and 

Cooking Products 

and Commercial 

Clothes Washers 

Analysis Tools 

The analytical spreadsheets 

below provide rulemaking 

findings and interactive tools for 

the life-cycle cost analysis, 

national impact analysis, 

government regulatory impact 

model, and regulatory impact 

analysis. Instructions on how to 

use the life-cycle cost analysis 

and national impact analysis 

spreadsheets can be found in 

the Technical Support 

Document. 

Life Cycle Cost and Payback 

Period Spreadsheets 

z Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

for Commercial Clothes 

Washers (Excel 435 KB) 

z Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

for Cooktops (Excel 1.2 

MB) 

z Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

for Ovens (Excel 1.3 MB) 

z Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

for Microwave Ovens 

(Excel 1.2 MB) 

National Impact Analysis 

Spreadsheets 

z National Impact Analysis 

Tool for Commercial 

EERE Information Center 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/home_appl_analys... 12/1/2008

EE2006STD0127 COMMENT 41.4
Building Technologies Program Home | EERE Home | U.S. Department of Energy

Webmaster | Web Site Policies | Security & Privacy | USA.gov 

Content Last Updated: 11/25/2008 

Clothes Washers (Excel

827 KB) 

z National Impact Analysis 

Tool for Cooktops and 

Ovens (Excel 2 MB) 

z National Impact Analysis 

Tool for Microwave Ovens 

(Excel 647 KB) 

Government Regulatory 

Impact Model Spreadsheets 

z Government Regulatory 

Impact Model for 

Commercial Clothes 

Washers (Excel 1.4 MB) 

z Government Regulatory 

Impact Model for 

Cooktops and Ovens 

(Excel 2.9 MB) 

z Government Regulatory 

Impact Model for 

Microwave Ovens (Excel

1.3 MB) 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Spreadsheets 

z Regulatory Impact 

Analysis Tool for 

Commercial Clothes 

Washers (Excel 1.9 MB) 

z Regulatory Impact 

Analysis Tool for Cooktops 

and Ovens (Excel 2.4 MB) 

z Regulatory Impact 

Analysis Tool for 

Microwave Ovens (Excel

2.5 MB) 

Printable Version 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/home_appl_analys... 12/1/2008

EE2006STD0127 COMMENT 41.4
#### Albert A. Antinelli et al., Respondents-Appellants, v William J. Toner, Appellant-Respondent.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs. Memorandum: Following the remand of this case to Supreme Court, Ontario County *(Antinelli v Toner,*74 AD2d 996), the Trial Judge made the following supplemental findings of fact: "That the starting of the payloader and backhoe engines as occurs in regular use causes noise sufficient to constitute a nuisance; that the revving of payloader and backhoe engines as occurs in regular use causes noise sufficient to constitute a nuisance; that the moving of the payloaders and backhoes, can and does include the starting and revving of the engines of that same machinery, in regular use, causes noise sufficient to constitute a nuisance.” Such findings, supported by the record, require affirmance of the judgment. (Resubmission —appeals from judgment of Ontario Supreme Court—injunction.) Present— Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Schnepp, Doerr and Moule, JJ.
<SEQUENCE>5
<FILENAME>fountain10q1203exh32.txt




EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATIONS
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned hereby certifies that (i) the foregoing quarterly
report on Form 10-Q filed by Fountain Powerboat Industries, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarter ended December 31, 2003, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information
contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.


Date:  February 13, 2003




/s/Reginald M. Fountain, Jr.
Reginald M. Fountain, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer



Date:  February 13, 2003




/s/ Irving L. Smith
Irving L. Smith
Chief Financial Officer