alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF MARCH 31, 1999 AND FOR THE
THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S.DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      10,846,297
<SECURITIES>                                41,895,232
<RECEIVABLES>                                  452,834
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     10,250
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            53,448,713
<PP&E>                                       7,850,435
<DEPRECIATION>                             (5,938,629)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              60,741,814
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,493,140
<BONDS>                                        800,442
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       22,653,650
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       348,620
<OTHER-SE>                                  30,445,962
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                60,741,814
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,580,378
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,728,917
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,661
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,710,838)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,710,838)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,710,838)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)
        

</TABLE>
IA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 71

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States repealing

the 22nd article of amendment, thereby removing the restrictions on

the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 1, 1995

Mr. MCNULTY (for himself and Mr. SHAYS) introduced the following joint

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States repealing the 22nd article of amendment, thereby

removing the restrictions on the number of terms an

individual may serve as President.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
2

•HJ 71 IH

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission

2 for ratification:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE—

4 ‘‘The twenty-second article of amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’’.

Æ
#### Stephen Lepore, Respondent, v Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., Appellant.

[806 NYS2d 66]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruditsky, J.), dated November 16, 2004, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff allegedly sustained personal injuries when, upon stepping onto an exterior step of a delivery truck, the step broke. The defendant provided the truck to the plaintiffs employer and was also responsible for providing “routine maintenance” service. The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant to recover damages for personal injuries. Thereafter, the defendant moved for summary judgment. The Supreme Court denied the motion. We reverse.

In support of its motion, the defendant made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by presenting evidence that it did not have notice of the alleged defective step *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320 [1986]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The affidavit of the plaintiffs expert, was speculative and insufficient to defeat the defendant’s motion *(see Tantuccio v Marina Holding Corp.,*20 AD3d 472 [2005]; *Amona v Orange & Rockland Util., Inc.,*17 AD3d 386 [2005]). Moreover, contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is not applicable here *(see Dermatossian v New York City Tr. Auth.,*67 NY2d 219, 226-228 [1986]).

Accordingly, the defendant’s motion should have been granted. Florio, J.P., Crane, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.
#### Allen Delaine, Respondent, v Finger Lakes Fire & Casualty Co., Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[803 NYS2d 477]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Frank A. Sedita, Jr., J.), entered July 13, 2004. The order transferred the action to Buffalo City Court.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in *Delaine v Finger Lakes Fire & Cas. Co.*(23 AD3d 1143 [2005]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Martoche and Hayes, JJ.
#### Shannon L. McCaslin, Appellant, v Todd A. Peterson, Respondent.

[803 NYS2d 456]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Chautauqua County (Paula L. Feroleto, J.), entered February 14, 2005 in a personal injury action. The order granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint based on lack of personal jurisdiction.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and *1029the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Martoche, Pine and Hayes, JJ.
I, Richard Altomare, certify that:

           1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Universal
Express, 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 the 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 or not 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.





                                          /S/ RICHARD A. ALTOMARE
                                          Richard A. Altomare, Chief Executive
                                          Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Dated:     November 14, 2003
§ 1.642(i)-2 Definitions. ( a ) *Taxable cemetery corporation.* For purposes of section 642(i) and this section, the meaning of the term *taxable cemetery corporation* is limited to a corporation (within the meaning of section 7701(a)(3)) engaged in the business of owning and operating a cemetery that either ( 1 ) is not exempt from Federal tax, or
( 2 ) is subject to tax under section 511 with respect to its cemetery activities.
( b ) *Pursuant to local law.* A cemetery perpetual care fund is created pursuant to local law if: ( 1 ) The governing law of the relevant jurisdiction (State, district, county, parish, etc.) requires or expressly permits the creation of such a fund, or
( 2 ) The legally enforceable bylaws or contracts of a taxable cemetery corporation require a perpetual care fund.
( c ) *Gravesite.* A gravesite is any type of interment right that has been sold by a cemetery, including, but not limited to, a burial lot, mausoleum, lawn crypt, niche, or scattering ground. For purposes of § 1.642 (i)-1, the term *gravesites* includes only those gravesites with respect to which the care fund or cemetery has an obligation for care and maintenance within the meaning of § 1.642 (i)-1(c)(1).
( d ) *Care and maintenance.* For purposes of section 642(i) and this section, the term *care and maintenance of gravesite* shall be generally defined in accordance with the definition of such term under the local law pursuant to which the cemetery perpetual care fund is created. If the applicable local law contains no definition, care and maintenance of gravesites may include the upkeep, repair and preservation of those portions of cemetery property in which gravesites (as defined in paragraph (c) of this section) have been sold; including gardening, road maintenance, water line and drain repair and other activities reasonably necessary to the preservation of cemetery property. The costs for care and maintenance include, but are not limited to, expenditures for the maintenance, repair and replacement of machinery, tools, and equipment, compensation of employees performing such work, insurance premiums, reasonable payments for employees' pension and other benefit plans, and the costs of maintaining necessary records of lot ownership, transfers and burials. However, if some of the expenditures of the cemetery corporation, such as officers' salaries, are for both care and maintenance and for other purposes, the expenditures must be properly allocated between care and maintenance of gravesites and the other purposes. Only those expenditures that are properly allocable to those portions of cemetery property in which gravesites have been sold qualify as expenditures for care and maintenance of gravesites.
[T.D. 7651, 44 FR 61596, Oct. 26, 1979]
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 1759** 

WAKE COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES , Plaintiff

- Appell ee ,

v.
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS , JR. , Defendant

- Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5 : 12

- cv - 004 1 3

- BO )

Submitted : November 19, 2013 Decided: November 21, 2013

Before WYNN and FLOYD , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
William Scott Davis, II , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: William Scott Davis, Jr., appeals the distri ct court ’ s order dismissing , for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, two

mo tion s to s tay and a motion to file an amended c omplaint

. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. As the district cou rt observed, the underlying proceeding has been remanded to state court. This court has dismissed Davis’ appeal
of the order of remand
. Wake Cnty. Human Servs. v. Davis , No. 13

- 1066, 2013 WL 3186471 (4th Cir. June 25, 2013) (unpublished). Therefore, the district cour t properly dismissed the motions at issue in this appeal , and we affirm the challenged order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AF FIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 47 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 47

      Honoring the memory of the victims of the Armenian Genocide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 23, 1995

Mr. Bonior and Mr. Blute submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
     which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
      Honoring the memory of the victims of the Armenian Genocide.

Whereas one and one-half million people of Armenian ancestry were victims of the 
        genocide perpetrated by the governments of the Ottoman Empire from 1915 
        to 1923, prior to the establishment of the Republic of Turkey;
Whereas each April, Members of Congress join the Armenian-American community in 
        remembrances across the United States to commemorate the Armenian 
        Genocide; and
Whereas by consistently remembering and openly condemning the atrocities 
        committed against Armenians, the Congress has helped to renew the 
        commitment of the people of the United States to oppose any and all 
        instances of genocide: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That--
            (1) the Congress joins the Armenian-American community in 
        honoring the memory of the victims of the Armenian Genocide; 
        and
            (2) the United States should encourage the Republic of 
        Turkey to take all appropriate steps to acknowledge and 
        commemorate the atrocity committed against the Armenian 
        population of the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923.
                                 <all>
```
IB

Union Calendar No. 116

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 102

[Report No. 104–220]

Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and

Realignment Commission.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 18, 1995

Mr. TEJEDA (for himself, Mr. BONILLA, Mr. GONZALEZ, and Mr. SMITH of

Texas) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on National Security

AUGUST 1, 1995

Reported adversely from the Committee on National Security, committed to

the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base

Closure and Realignment Commission.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Congress disapproves the recommendations of the

4 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission as

5 submitted by the President on July 13, 1995.
Union Calendar No. 116

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 102

[Report No. 104–220]

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense

Base Closure and Realignment Commission.

AUGUST 1, 1995

Reported adversely from the Committee on National Seprinted House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be curity, committed to the Committee of the Whole
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS NINE MONTH YEAR-TO-DATE SUMMARY FINANCIAL
INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AMERICAN BIOGENETIC SCIENCES INC. 1996
THIRD QUARTER FORM 10-Q SEPTEMBER 30,1996
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       7,187,000
<SECURITIES>                                 5,721,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,908,000
<PP&E>                                       1,681,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,116,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,085,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          622,000
<BONDS>                                     10,900,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,534,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,085,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,952,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             318,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,574,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,574,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,574,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.27)
        


</TABLE>
IA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 44

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide

for four-year terms for Members of the House of Representatives and

to provide that Members may not serve more than three terms.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. STUMP introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States to provide for four-year terms for Members of

the House of Representatives and to provide that Members may not serve more than three terms.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents

6 and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by
2

•HJ 44 IH

1 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States

2 within seven years from the date of its submission by the

3 Congress:

4 ‘‘ARTICLE—

5 ‘‘SECTION 1. The term of office of a Member of the

6 House of Representatives shall be four years, beginning

7 with the first election of Representatives occurring after

8 the ratification of this article.

9 ‘‘SECTION 2. No person who has been elected to three

10 four-year terms in the House of Representatives shall be

11 eligible for election to the House of Representatives.’’.

Æ
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Joseph Mulea, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[803 NYS2d 286]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Ap*754peal Board, filed March 18, 2005, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct.

Claimant worked as a deli counter clerk for approximately five months. He was terminated after he failed to comply with his supervisor’s instructions to perform certain tasks and directed racial slurs at the supervisor. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ultimately ruled that he was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct. He now appeals.

We affirm. It is well settled that “an employee’s use of offensive language or engaging in disrespectful and insubordinate conduct toward [a] supervisor[ ] may constitute disqualifying misconduct” *(Matter of Caraballo [Rochester Plating*Works—*Commissioner of Labor],*297 AD2d 856 [2002]; *see Matter of Pagan [Haig Press—Commissioner of Labor],*305 AD2d 845 [2003]). In the case at hand, the employer’s human resource manager testified that she was called to respond to an incident in which claimant had called the police and refused to perform duties directed by his supervisor. She also stated that he used racial slurs toward the supervisor. Such conduct was grounds for termination under the terms of the employee handbook, which claimant received. Although claimant gave contrary testimony that he was fired for no reason, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve *(see Matter of Mercurio [Commissioner of Labor],*301 AD2d 939, 940 [2003]; *Matter of Sanderson [Commissioner of Labor],*275 AD2d 844, 845 [2000]) and the Board could choose to discredit it particularly in view of claimant’s disruptive behavior and use of profanity during the hearings before the administrative law judges. Under these circumstances, substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.