alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Fanny HAMMEL, d/b/a Royal Construction Cleaning/Century Village East, Inc., Appellants, v. Florence PITTMAN, Appellee.

No. SS-214.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 4, 1980.

*1221Thomas E. Kingcade of Levy, Plisco, Perry, Shapiro, Kneen & Kingcade, P. A., Palm Beach, and Randall J. DeHayes, House Counsel, West Palm Beach, for appellants.

Louisa Smith-Adam of Montgomery, Ly-tal, Reiter, Denney and Search, P. A., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Century Village East, Inc. appeals the deputy’s order finding that appellee was an employee of Fanny Hammel, d/b/a Royal Construction Cleaning and that Fanny Hammel was a subcontractor of Century Village East, Inc., the owner and general contractor responsible for workers’ compensation coverage for the appellee. We fully agree that claimant was not an independent contractor, but we must reverse on the ground that Century Village East, Inc. is not an employer within the meaning of Section 440.10(1), Florida Statutes (1977).

The status of an independent contractor depends upon the parties’ dealings with each other and the existence of a sufficient group of favorable factors to establish the relation. *Cantor*v. *Cochran,*184 So.2d 173, 174 (Fla.1966). Although there were factors pointing in each direction, suffice it to say that the regularity of appel-lee’s employment, the type of labor performed, and Hammel’s ability to fire appel-lee without liability, justify the finding of an employer-employee relationship versus an independent contractor relationship. *Cantor*v. *Cochran; Brewer*v. *Cueto,*379 So.2d 1322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

Although the deputy properly concluded that appellee was an employee of Hammel, this does not settle the issue of whether Century Village East, Inc. was liable to appellee for workers’ compensation benefits. The evidence revealed that Century Village East, Inc. was not only the general contractor, but that it was building condominiums for itself for resale. Under Section 440.10, in case a contractor sublets any part of his contract work to a subcontractor, all of the employees of the subcontractor engaged on such work are deemed to be employed in the same business, and the contractor is liable for payment of workers’ compensation to the employees, except to employees of a subcontractor who has secured the same. In this instance there is no contractor-subcontractor relationship between Century Village East, Inc. and appellee’s employer, Hammel, because Century Village East, Inc. had no primary obligation under a contract, which it passed on to Hammel as subcontractor. *Jones v. Florida Power Corporation,*72 So.2d 285 (Fla.1954); *Southseas Plantation, Ltd. v. Acevedo,*387 So.2d 1035 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); *State v. Luckie,*145 So.2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962). Accordingly, that portion of the order requiring Century Village East, Inc., as employer, to pay workers’ compensation benefits must be reversed.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., BOOTH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 414
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 414 appear at 60 FR 50442, Sept. 29, 1995, and 60 FR 53877, Oct. 18, 1995.

§ 414.316 Payment for physician services to patients in training for self-dialysis and home dialysis. ( a ) For each patient, the carrier pays a flat amount that covers all physician services required to create the capacity for self-dialysis and home dialysis.
( b ) CMS determines the amount on the basis of program experience and reviews it periodically.
( c ) The payment is made at the end of the training course, is subject to the deductible and coinsurance provisions, and is in addition to any amounts payable under the initial or MCP methods set forth in §§ 414.313 and 414.314, respectively.
( d ) If the training is not completed, the payment amount is proportionate to the time spent in training.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Presidential
Associates I Limited Partnership and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             527,559
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       37,518
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     565,077
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       565,077
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   202,719
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    202,585
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                202,585
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       202,585
<EPS-BASIC>                                          340
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          340



</TABLE>
#### John T. Bird, as Receiver, Etc., Respondent, *v.*Snow, Church *& Co.,*Appellant.

Appeal from an order and judgment of the Second Municipal Court, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the plaintiff.

Campbell *&*Hance, for appellant.

Gayley, Baucus *&*Fleming, for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

After issue was joined herein, the defendant obtained a number of adjournments, but it was finally stipulated in writing by the parties that the action should be tried on March 25, 1898, and no further adjournment should be asked for by either party. On that day, the plaintiff attended at the court, prepared to try the case, when defendant’s attorney asked for another adjournment. The court refused the request, and an inquest was taken. Subsequently defendant moved to open the default, which motion was granted, upon reasonable terms, with which defendant never complied, nor did it appeal from the order opening the default. It did appeal, however, from the original order denying the motion for an adjournment and also from the judgment rendered on the default.

It is our opinion that, under the circumstances disclosed, the trial court was fully warranted- in denying the application and in rendering judgment on defendant’s default. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Gildersleeve and Giegerich, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Supplemental Instructions for Reporting Students with Intellectual Disabilities Data on the 

Fiscal Operations Report for 2014-2015 and Application to Participate for 2016-2017 (FISAP)

Introduction

Under section 484(s) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, a student with intellectual 

disabilities who enrolls in an eligible Comprehensive Transition and Postsecondary (CTP) program may 

receive Title IV program funds under the Federal Pell Grant (Pell Grant), Federal Supplemental 

Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG), and Federal Work-Study (FWS) programs. These students are 

not eligible to receive funding under other Title IV programs, such as the Federal Perkins Loan Program. 

These students must meet all of the student eligibility requirements in 34 CFR 668.233. Under those 

regulations, students with an intellectual disability, among other things, do not have to be high school 

graduates, have obtained a GED, or have passed an ability-to-benefit test, and they do not have to be 

enrolled in a program that leads to a degree or certificate. 

Special FISAP Supplemental Instructions

Because only a small number of institutions participating in the Campus-Based programs have approved

CTP programs at this time, we have not altered the original instructions on the FISAP. The FISAP 

currently only refers to students in regular academic programs. However, institutions that enroll eligible 

students with intellectual disabilities in an approved CTP program must also include these students in 

the appropriate fields on the FISAP as explained below:

Application to Participate for 2016-2017 portion of the FISAP

Part II, Section A. Request for Funds for the 2016-2017 Award Year

In completing Part II, Section A , field 3 (FSEOG federal funds) and field 4 (FWS federal funds) the 

institution must include the funds it plans to award to students in the CTP program.

Part II, Section D. Information on Enrollment

In completing Part II, Section D, the institution must include the CTP program students as undergraduate 

students. 

Part II, Section E. Assessments and Expenditures

In completing Part II, Section E, the institution must include any tuition and fees revenue collected for 

CTP program students in the undergraduate column in field 22 and it must include the Federal Pell Grant 

funds paid to these students in field 23(a). 

Part II, Section F. Information on Eligible Aid Applicants Enrolled in Your School

In completing Part II, Section F, the institution must include the CTP program students who applied for 

financial aid for the 2014-2015 Award Year, regardless of whether or not they received financial aid. 

Fiscal Operations Report for 2014-2015 portion of the FISAP 

Part IV. FSEOG Program, Part V. FWS Program, and Part VI. Program Summary

In completing Parts IV, V, and VI of FISAP, the institution must include any CTP program students in the 

appropriate fields if they had received FSEOG and/or FWS funds for the 2014-2015 Award Year.
Exhibit 32.2  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 on Form 10-Q of Merchants Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Janet P. Spitler, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Principal Accounting 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, to the best of my knowledge: (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.    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


| |     |                                                                                  
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ Janet P. Spitler                                                             
| |     | Janet P. Spitler
Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer
Principal Accounting Officer
| |     |                                                                                  
| |     | August 9, 2010                                                                   
| |     | Date
# C_2006022EN.01001302.xml

| 28.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/13

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 November 2005 — Soffass v OHIM

(Case T-396/04) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark containing the verbal element ‘NICKY’ - Earlier national figurative marks containing the verbal element ‘NOKY’ - Rejection of opposition for absence of likelihood of confusion - Annulled by the Board of Appeal - Remittal to the Opposition Division to examine whether the goods are similar and the proof of use - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2006/C 22/26)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant(s): Soffass (Porcari, Italy) (represented by: V. Bilardo and C. Bacchini, lawyers)

Applicant(s):

Defendant(s): Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Capostagno, Agent)

Defendant(s):

Other party or parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Sodipan SCA (Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, France) (represented by: N. Boespflug, lawyer)

Other party or parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Application for

action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 July 2004 (Case R 699/2003 1), relating to opposition proceedings between Soffass SpA and Sodipan SCA

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders the applicant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 8.1.2005.

1

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Elmo Patrick SONNIER.

No. 67043.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 14, 1980.

In re Elmo Patrick Sonnier applying for supervisory writs. Parish of Iberia. No. 27,383.

Writ denied.

delaHOUSSAYE, J., recused.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 19 (Friday, January 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 5690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2159]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]


In the Matter of Future Canada China Environment Inc.; Order of 
Suspension of Trading

January 28, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that the 
public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of 
trading in the securities of Future Canada China Environment Inc. 
Questions have arisen concerning recent trading activity in the 
company's stock during which its share price increased from $0.92 to 
$28.50. Questions have also arisen concerning the accuracy and adequacy 
of publicly available information regarding its potential acquisition 
of another company. Future Canada China Environment Inc., a company 
that has made public filings with the Commission, is quoted on the OTC 
Bulletin Board and Pink Sheets operated by Pink OTC Markets Inc. under 
the ticker symbol ``FCCE.''
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the 
protection of the investors require a suspension of trading in 
securities of the above-listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the above-listed 
company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST, January 28, 
2009, through 11:59 p.m. EST, on February 10, 2009.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-2159 Filed 1-28-09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### Daniel G. DIEFENDERFER, Jr. et al. v. LOUISIANA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 66891.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 14, 1980.

In re Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company et al., applying for certio-rari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of West Baton Rouge. 383 So.2d 1032.

Granted.
# C_2005273EN.01000301.xml

| 4.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 273/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

1 November 2005

(2005/C 273/03)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2008 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 140,02 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4626 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,67900 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5780 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5466 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 72,34 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7825 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5737 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 29,648 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 250,61 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6963 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9745 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,6643 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,51 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 39,042 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,6258 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6090 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4201 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,3087 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7181 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0352 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 252,25 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,9817 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,7097 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3788 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 139,00 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,535 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 65,984 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,3270 |
| THB | Thai baht | 48,975 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2008

JPY

Japanese yen

140,02

DKK

Danish krone

7,4626

GBP

Pound sterling

0,67900

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5780

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5466

ISK

Iceland króna

72,34

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7825

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5737

CZK

Czech koruna

29,648

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

250,61

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6963

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9745

RON

Romanian leu

3,6643

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,51

SKK

Slovak koruna

39,042

TRY

Turkish lira

1,6258

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6090

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4201

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,3087

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7181

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0352

KRW

South Korean won

1 252,25

ZAR

South African rand

7,9817

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,7097

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3788

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 139,00

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,535

PHP

Philippine peso

65,984

RUB

Russian rouble

34,3270

THB

Thai baht

48,975

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0479 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DANIEL M. ALLEN ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 2, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 25 2022

01/25/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0479
Exhibit
        23.1
 
 
 
 **INDEPENDENT
        AUDITOR'S CONSENT**
 
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed Registration
        Statements of PAB Bankshares, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-74819, 333-89527
        and 333-107039) and Form S-3D (33-74080) of our report, dated January 26,
        2006,
        appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of PAB Bankshares, Inc. for
        the
        year ended December 31, 2005.
 
 
 
 /s/
                  Mauldin & Jenkins, LLC
 
 
 
 Albany,
        Georgia
 March
        16,
        2006
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

       Certification Of Periodic Financial Report Pursuant to Section 906
            of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Capital Institutional Real
Estate, Ltd.-2 (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September
30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), each of Douglas Crocker, as President and Chief Executive
Officer of First Capital Financial, L.L.C., the General Partner of the
Partnership (the "General Partner"), and Philip Tinkler, as Vice President--
Finance and Treasurer of the General Partner, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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
Partnership.


/s/ Douglas Crocker
----------------------------------------
Douglas Crocker
President and Chief Executive Officer
November 13, 2002


/s/ Philip Tinkler
----------------------------------------
Philip Tinkler
Vice President--Finance and Treasurer
November 13, 2002
Exhibit 32

                  PRESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATES I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                         FORM 10-QSB SEPTEMBER 30, 2005

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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Presidential Associates I
Limited Partnership (the "Partnership"), on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the
date indicated below, hereby certifies 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 and 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 Partnership.

Date: November 11, 2005                                  /s/ Michael L. Ashner
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Michael L. Ashner
                                                         Chief Executive Officer


Date: November 11, 2005                                  /s/ Thomas Staples
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Thomas Staples
                                                         Chief Financial Officer


                                    16 of 16