alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

 NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

C.O., A CHILD,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 5D16-2844

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

________________________________/

Opinion filed November 4, 2016

Petition for Certiorari Review of Order 

from the Circuit Court for Orange County,

Gail Adams, Judge.

Robert Wesley, Public Defender, and 

Colleen Wapole, Assistant Public 

Defender, Orlando, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Andrea K. Totten, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona 

Beach, for Respondent.

ON CONCESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

C.O., a child, seeks certiorari review of an order placing him in residential mental 

health treatment due to his purported incapacity. The State concedes C.O. is entitled to 

relief. We agree and grant the writ.
2

An order of involuntary commitment to a mental health facility is reviewable by 

certiorari. See M.H. v. State, 901 So. 2d 197, 198 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). To obtain a writ 

of certiorari there must exist: (1) a departure from the essential requirements of the law, 

(2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of the case, (3) that cannot be corrected 

on post-judgment appeal. Id. at 200. When competent, substantial evidence does not 

support the trial court's finding regarding competency or involuntary commitment, the trial 

court has departed from the essential requirements of the law. Id. Accord Dep’t of 

Children & Families v. Ewell, 949 So. 2d 327, 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

C.O. argues, and the State concedes, that the trial court departed from the 

essential requirements of law when it placed him in a residential mental health treatment

facility after finding him incompetent. C.O. does not dispute that he is incompetent, but 

argues that there is no competent, substantial evidence to support placing him in secure 

residential treatment. The State agrees that the necessary evidentiary support to commit 

C.O. to residential treatment is lacking. We agree, as the reports relied on by the trial 

court were stale. See In re Commitment of Reilly, 970 So. 2d 453, 455-56 (Fla. 2d DCA 

2007); Brockman v. State, 852 So. 2d 330, 333 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Therefore, we grant 

the petition, quash the order below, and remand this matter to the circuit court for further 

proceedings.

CERTIORARI GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
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 on Form 10-Q of Arrow Resources
Development, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended on March 31,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Peter Frugone, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.




/s/ Peter
Frugone





Peter
Frugone





Date: June
18, 2010.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 4316

_____________________________
E DWARD A BRUSCATO , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County

. John H. Skinner , Judge

. August 13, 2019

O N M OTION FOR R EHEARING OR FOR W RITTEN O PINION

We deny Appellant’s motion for rehearing, grant his motion for written opinion, and substitute the following opinion for the original one.

P ER C URIAM

.

A FFIRMED

. See Butler v. State , 838 So. 2d 554, 556 (Fla. 2003) (“[W]hen section 921.024(2) [Fla. Stat.] applies so that the statutory maximum as provided in section 775.082[] is exceeded by the lowest permissible sentence under the code, the lowest permissible sentence under the code becomes the maximum sentence which the trial judge can impose.”); see also Busbee v. State , 187 So. 3d 1266, 1268

- 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016 ) (concluding2 lowest permissible sentence under code scoresheet would be appropriate rather than statutory maximum for tw o crimes committed).

W OLF , M AKAR , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY TO SUCH
10-QSB FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                          80,814
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  340,390
<ALLOWANCES>                                    73,144
<INVENTORY>                                  1,573,289
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,922,522
<PP&E>                                         214,900
<DEPRECIATION>                                 155,217
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,989,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,552,785
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    460,000
<COMMON>                                        39,295
<OTHER-SE>                                    (62,668)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,989,412
<SALES>                                        708,741
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               708,741
<CGS>                                          645,485
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  645,485
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,023,841
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,142
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,965,727)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,967,527)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,967,527)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)
        

</TABLE>
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

In Re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO

as a representative of

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO et 

al.

Debtors.1

PROMESA Title III

NO.: 17-BK-3283-LTS

(Jointly Administered)

This filing relates to the 

Commonwealth.

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND REQUEST FOR SERVICE

TO THE CLERK OF THIS COURT AND ALL PARTIES OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 83(D)(a) of the Local Rules of Civil 

Procedure for the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, Fed. R.

Bank. Proc. 9010(b) and Local Rule 9010-1(c), that I am admitted to practice in this 

court, appear as counsel for CREDITOR, EMPRESAS OMAJEDE INC. and request that, 

pursuant to sections 102(1), 342 and 1109(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, Fed. R. Bank.

Proc. 2002, 3017 and 9007 and Local Rule 9010-1(d)(2), all filed papers; all notices

given or required to be given; and all notices and orders notified or served by the court

or any party, be given to, notified and served upon the undersigned at:

Monique Diaz Mayoral

P.O. Box 364134

San Juan, PR 00936-4134

(754)755-5508

m@diazmayorallaw.com

1 The Last Four Digits of the Federal Tax ID of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17- BK-3283 (LTS)) is 3481.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22704 Filed:10/27/22 Entered:10/27/22 10:14:24 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

The creditor’s address for notifications is:

Empresas Omajede Inc.

Att. Antonio Betancourt

Edif. La Electrónica

1608 Calle Bori, Suite 218

San Juan, PR 00927

787-766-0872

eoinc@zellius.net

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE: IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that, on this same date, I 

electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system,

which will send a true and exact copy of this paper to all registered participants.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, in San Juan, PR, this 27th day of October, 2022.

DML |Diaz Mayoral Law

Attorney for Empresas Omajede Inc.

s/ Monique Diaz Mayoral

USDC-PR No. 225712

151 San Francisco Street

San Juan, PR 00901

(754)755-5508

m@diazmayorallaw.com

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22704 Filed:10/27/22 Entered:10/27/22 10:14:24 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
§ 44.16 Ownership of interests in and sponsorship of issuers of certain collateralized debt obligations backed by trust-preferred securities. ( a ) The prohibition contained in § 44.10(a)(1) does not apply to the ownership by a banking entity of an interest in, or sponsorship of, any issuer if: ( 1 ) The issuer was established, and the interest was issued, before May 19, 2010;
( 2 ) The banking entity reasonably believes that the offering proceeds received by the issuer were invested primarily in Qualifying TruPS Collateral; and
( 3 ) The banking entity acquired such interest on or before December 10, 2013 (or acquired such interest in connection with a merger with or acquisition of a banking entity that acquired the interest on or before December 10, 2013).
( b ) For purposes of this § 44.16, *Qualifying TruPS Collateral* shall mean any trust preferred security or subordinated debt instrument issued prior to May 19, 2010 by a depository institution holding company that, as of the end of any reporting period within 12 months immediately preceding the issuance of such trust preferred security or subordinated debt instrument, had total consolidated assets of less than $15,000,000,000 or issued prior to May 19, 2010 by a mutual holding company.
( c ) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(3) of this section, a banking entity may act as a market maker with respect to the interests of an issuer described in paragraph (a) of this section in accordance with the applicable provisions of §§ 44.4 and 44.11.
( d ) Without limiting the applicability of paragraph (a) of this section, the Board, the FDIC and the OCC will make public a non-exclusive list of issuers that meet the requirements of paragraph (a). A banking entity may rely on the list published by the Board, the FDIC and the OCC.
[79 FR 5227, Jan. 31, 2014]
221021 EXHIBIT A. APPEARANCE SHEET VERSION OCTOBER 21, 2022 1 

EXHIBIT A1

PARTY APPEARANCE SHEET

Name of Party 

ATTORNEY 1 Appearance Method In Person NY/PR or CourtSolutions Speaking Line2

Name

Law Firm

Email

Phone Number 

Docket Entry No. of 

Notice of Appearance

ATTORNEY 2 Appearance Method In Person NY/PR or CourtSolutions Speaking Line 

Name

Law Firm

Email

Phone Number 

Docket Entry No. of 

Notice of Appearance

ADDITIONAL 

ATTORNEY 

OBSERVATION

Complete the below 

information for each 

attorney appearing for 

observation purposes. 

Name 

CourtSolutions 

Listen Only 

In Person – NY 

In Person – PR 

Law Firm

Email 

Phone Number 

Pursuant to the Hearing Procedures Order ¶ 6, in-person participation by counsel will be prioritized 

in the following manner: the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico and the 

Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority shall each be permitted 4 attorneys 

present in the courtroom, and each other party-in-interest shall be permitted 2 attorneys present in 

the courtroom. 

Space permitting, additional attorneys who wish to view but not participate in the hearing may gain 

admittance to the New York Courtroom and San Juan Courtroom, on a first-come first-served 

basis. All attorneys who wish to observe in person must be listed on this appearance sheet. 

1

 This Party Appearance Sheet must be attached to a party in interest’s Informative Motion as 

Exhibit A. 2

 Pursuant to the Hearing Procedures Order ¶ 2, attorneys intending to appear by CourtSolutions 

must also separately register on the CourtSolutions website. 

Lilia Molina Ruiz

José Luis Novas-Debien

Law Offices of José Luis Novas-Debién, P.S.C.

jnovas1@gmail.com

 787-640-2174

21190

In person, Clemente Ruiz Nazario, U.S. Courthouse

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22698-1 Filed:10/26/22 Entered:10/26/22 17:07:02 Desc:

Exhibit A Page 1 of 1
# C_2021022EN.01003201.xml

| 21.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/32

---

EFTA Surveillance Authority’s notice on state aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for the EFTA States applicable as from 1 November 2020

Published in accordance with the rules on reference and discount rates set out in Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines and Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL of 14 July 2004
   (1)

(2021/C 22/04)

Base rates are calculated in accordance with the Chapter on the method for setting reference and discount rates of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines as amended by ESA’s Decision No 788/08/COL of 17 December 2008. To obtain the applicable reference rates, appropriate margins shall be added to the base rate in accordance with the State Aid Guidelines.

Base rates have been determined as follows:

| | Iceland | Liechtenstein | Norway |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1.11.2020 – | 1,80 | - 0,55 | 0,32 |

Iceland

Liechtenstein

Norway

1.11.2020 –

1,80

- 0,55

0,32

---

(1)  
  OJ L 139, 25.5.2006, p. 37 and EEA Supplement to the OJ No. 26/2006, 25 May 2006, p. 1.

1

---
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22672-3 Filed:10/21/22 Entered:10/24/22 10:16:33 D

Envelope Page 1 of 1
§ 367.16 Ethics Counselor decisions. ( a ) Standard of proof: ( 1 ) An exclusion must be based on a finding that the cause(s) for exclusion is established by a preponderance of the evidence in the administrative record of the case; and
( 2 ) A suspension must be based on a finding that the cause(s) for suspension is established by adequate evidence in the administrative record of the case.
( b ) The administrative record consists of the portion of any information, reports, documents or other evidence identified and relied upon in the Notice of Possible Cause to Exclude, the Notice of Suspension and/or supplemental notices, if any, together with any material portions of the contractor's response. When additional proceedings are necessary to determine disputed material facts, the Ethics Counselor shall base the decision on the facts as found, together with any information and argument submitted by the contractor and any other information in the administrative record.
( c ) In actions based upon a conviction, judgment, a final enforcement action by a federal financial institution regulatory agency, or in which all facts and circumstances material to the exclusion action have been finally adjudicated in another forum, the Ethics Counselor may exclude a contractor without regard to the procedures set out in §§ 367.13 and 367.14. Any such decisions will be subject to the review and reconsideration provisions of § 367.20.
( d ) *Notice of decisions.* Contractors shall be given prompt notice of the Ethics Counselor's decision in the manner described in § 367.13(c). If the Ethics Counselor suspends a contractor or imposes a period of exclusion, the decision shall: ( 1 ) Set forth the cause(s) for suspension and/or exclusion included in the notice that were found by a preponderance of the evidence with reference to the administrative record support for that finding;
( 2 ) Set forth the effect of the exclusion action and the effective dates of that action;
( 3 ) Refer the contractor to its procedural rights of review and reconsideration under § 367.20; and
( 4 ) Inform the contractor that a copy of the exclusion decision shall be placed in the FDIC Public Reading Room.
( e ) If the FDIC Ethics Counselor decides that a period of exclusion is not warranted, the Notice of Possible Cause to Exclude may be withdrawn or the proceeding may be otherwise terminated. A decision to terminate an exclusion proceeding may include the imposition of appropriate conditions on the contractor in their future dealings with the FDIC.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS**
     We have issued our report dated June 7, 2004 (except for Note 16, as towhich the date is June 18, 2004), accompanying the consolidated financialstatements and schedule included in this Amendment No. 3 to the Annual Reportof MTI Technology Corporation and subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year endedApril 3, 2004. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of saidreport in the Registration Statements of MTI Technology Corporation on FormsS-8 (Nos. 333-117401, 333-109060, 333-103065,, 333-76972, 333-69030, 333-66716,333-95915, 333-92623, 333-85579, 333-61957, 333-46363, 333-50377, 333-18501,33-75180 and 33-80438) and Form S-3 (Nos. 333-118657 and 333-85410).
/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
Irvine, California
#### DUKE POWER COMPANY, RESPONDENT, v. THE ESSEX COUNTY BOARD OF TAXATION AND THE CITY OF NEWARK, APPELLANTS.

Submitted October 27, 1939

Decided January 25, 1940.

For the appellants, *James F. X. O’Brien.*

For the respondent, *Pitney, Hardin*& *Skinner.*

*42Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Bodine in the Supreme Court.

*For affirmance*—The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Case, Donges, Heher, Porter, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, JJ. 10.

*To remand*—The Chancellor. 1.
#### THOMAS *F.*THOMPSON *v.*MARGARET THOMPSON.

Divorce — wilful absence — quarrel.

Where the husband and wife quarrel, and on Sunday he gets the hymn book to sing, and she takes it from him and throws herself on the bed and keeps it till he gets lonesome, lifts her up and pours water over her, and she then leaves him and continues absent more than three years, refusing to return, they may be divorced.

Divorce. Cause, wilful absence. The parties married about five years since, and lived together three months. They disagreed. One Sunday, they went to church together. Her father and brothers were there, and when the service closed, she went home with them, refusing to go with her husband. On the way, he tried to speak to her, but was prevented by the brothers. The next morning her father and brothers went to petitioner’s house, and brought away all *the plunder*she took there when they were married. Mutual complaints followed this step at law. She swore against him that he abused her, and tramped on her feet. He, that when he trod on her toes, she was aggravating him, and that one Sunday he wanted the hymn book to sing, when she took it and went and threw herself on the bed and kept it from him; he soon became lonesome, and lifted her olf the bed and poured water upon her to wake her up. He appeared always anxious to make up and to live with her, but she refused, and has continued absent more than three years.

By the Court.

Let them be divorced.
EXHIBIT 32.1


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

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section
906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to my knowledge,
the  quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB (the  "Report") of ANTs  software  inc., a
Delaware corporation (the "Company"), for the quarter ended September 30, 2004:

         1. 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.

Date:    November 12, 2004                By:  /s/ Francis K. Ruotolo
                                              --------------------------------
                                              Francis K. Ruotolo, Chairman and
                                              Chief Executive Officer


A signed  original  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
upon request.
§ 46.1 Authority and purpose. ( a ) *Authority.* 12 U.S.C. 93a; 12 U.S.C. 1463(a)(2); 12 U.S.C. 5365(i)(2); 12 U.S.C. 5412(b)(2)(B).
( b ) *Purpose.* This part implements 12 U.S.C. 5365(i)(2), which requires a national bank or Federal savings association with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion to conduct an annual stress test and establishes a definition of stress test, methodologies for conducting stress tests, and reporting and disclosure requirements.
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 on Form 10-Q of Alliance Financial Corporation (Alliance) for the quarter ended
March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack H. Webb, Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer of Alliance, 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, as amended;
and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Alliance.



|                   |  |                                                                                                        
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 7, 2010 |  |                                                                                                        
|                   | 
|                   |  | /s/ Jack H. Webb                                                                                       
|                   |  | Jack H. Webb Chairman of
the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, 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, 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.