alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

15 

CA 12-01473 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ. 

 

WILLIAM JOSEPH DEANGELIS AND KAREN DEANGELIS, 

PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MARTENS FARMS, LLC, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, 

AND KRISTIE E. MARION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

(APPEAL NO. 2.)

 

BARTH SULLIVAN BEHR, SYRACUSE (DAVID WALSH OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

SUGARMAN LAW FIRM, LLP, SYRACUSE (ESAM AHMAD ELBADAWI OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS. 

GOLDBERG SEGALLA LLP, SYRACUSE (KENNETH M. ALWEIS OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Mark H.

Fandrich, A.J.), entered May 23, 2012. The order bifurcated the

trial. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this negligence action in which plaintiffs seek

damages for injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiff William Joseph

DeAngelis in a motor vehicle accident, Supreme Court did not abuse its

discretion in granting the motion of defendant Martens Farms, LLC

(Martens) to bifurcate the trial. Although issues of liability and

damages in a negligence action generally “are distinct and severable

and should be tried separately” (Iglesias v Brown, 59 AD3d 992, 993;

see 22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]), an exception to that rule arises where the

plaintiff’s injuries have “an important bearing” on the issue of

liability (Parmar v Skinner, 154 AD2d 444, 445; see Kotarski v Kotecki

& Sons, 239 AD2d 909, 910). Notably, plaintiffs supported the motion

while defendant Kristie E. Marion opposed bifurcation. In opposing

the motion, however, Marion failed to establish the need to depart

from the general rule (see Hrusa v Bogdan, 278 AD2d 947, 947;

Armstrong v Adelman Automotive Parts Distrib. Corp., 176 AD2d 773,

773-774; see also Fetterman v Evans, 204 AD2d 888, 889-890).

Entered: March 15, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
§ 308.170 Filing, content, and service of documents. ( a ) *Time to file.* An application and any other pleading or document related to the application shall be filed with the Administrative Officer within 30 days after service of the final order of the Board of Directors in disposition of the proceeding whenever: ( 1 ) The applicant seeks an award pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 504(a)(1) as the prevailing party in the adversary adjudication or in a discrete significant substantive portion of the proceeding; or
( 2 ) The applicant, in an adversary adjudication arising from an action to enforce compliance with a statutory or regulatory requirement, asserts pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 504(a)(4) that the demand by the FDIC is substantially in excess of the decision of the administrative law judge and is unreasonable when compared with such decision under the facts and circumstances of the case.
( b ) *Content.* The application and related documents shall conform to the requirements of § 308.10(b) and (c) of the Uniform Rules.
( c ) *Service.* The application and related documents shall be served on all parties to the adversary adjudication in accordance with § 308.11 of the Uniform Rules, except that statements of net worth shall be served only on counsel for the FDIC.
( d ) *Referral.* Upon receipt of an application, the Administrative Officer shall refer the matter to the administrative law judge who heard the underlying adversary proceeding, provided that if the original administrative law judge is unavailable, or the Administrative Officer determines, in his or her sole discretion, that there is cause to refer the matter to a different administrative law judge, the matter shall be referred to a different administrative law judge.
[56 FR 37975, Aug. 9, 1991, as amended at 64 FR 62102, Nov. 16, 1999; 86 FR 2250, Jan. 12, 2021]
# C_2021141EN.01000301.xml

| 22.4.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.4.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/3

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2021/C 141/03)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 16 December 2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 85854 |
| Decision No | 148/20/COL |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Prolongation of the zero VAT rating for zero-emission vehicles 2021–2022 |
| Legal basis | The VAT provisions are laid down in the Act on Value Added Tax of 19 June 2009 No 58 and the Regulation concerning Value Added Tax of 15 December 2009 No 1540. |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | Environmental aid |
| Form of aid | Tax exemption |
| Budget | Around NOK 6.7 billion annually (estimate based on budgetary year 2020 tax expenditure) |
| Duration | 1 January 2021 – 31 December 2022 |
| Economic sectors | Manufacture of motor vehicles; Manufacture of batteries and accumulators; Wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministry of Finance |
| P. O Box 8008 Dep. |
| 0030 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

16 December 2020

Case No

85854

Decision No

148/20/COL

EFTA State

Norway

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Prolongation of the zero VAT rating for zero-emission vehicles 2021–2022

Legal basis

The VAT provisions are laid down in the Act on Value Added Tax of 19 June 2009 No 58 and the Regulation concerning Value Added Tax of 15 December 2009 No 1540.

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Environmental aid

Form of aid

Tax exemption

Budget

Around NOK 6.7 billion annually (estimate based on budgetary year 2020 tax expenditure)

Duration

1 January 2021 – 31 December 2022

Economic sectors

Manufacture of motor vehicles; Manufacture of batteries and accumulators; Wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministry of Finance

P. O Box 8008 Dep.

0030 Oslo

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---
#### § 615.5353 Relation to other actions.

In lieu of, or in addition to, the procedures in this subpart, the required minimum capital ratios for an institution may be established or revised through a written agreement or cease and desist proceedings under part C of title V of the Act, or as a condition for approval of an application.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         108,445
<SECURITIES>                                   123,248
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,041
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               277,258
<PP&E>                                       8,615,250
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,303,609
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,686,364
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,122,979
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,686,364
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               301,046
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  195,750
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             105,268
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        28
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Sanitized – Attachment 004Page1of1
Name of Party 

ATTORNEY 1 Appearance Method CourtSolutions Speaking Line

Name

Law Firm

Email

Phone Number

Docket Entry No. of

Notice of Appearance

EXHIBIT A 

PARTY APPEARANCE SHEET

22612 

Office - (939) 250-0179 / (787) 616-9374

eliaslaureano@gmail.com

O’Neill Security & Consultant Services Inc. 

Elias Laureano Fernandez-Perez

Fernandez Law Office

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23002-1 Filed:12/07/22 Entered:12/07/22 09:47:14 Desc:

Exhibit A Page 1 of 1
CHATTED MORTGAGES.

[Butler Circuit Court,

October Term, 1895.]

Swing, Cox and Smith, JJ.

#### Morey, Andrews & Morey v. Pierce.

[aen oe as Against Operatives oe Mortgagor.

Where a chattel mortgage, given within two months before an assignment for benefit of creditors, is produced, it is incumbent on the mortgagee as against the lien of the mortgagor’s operatives for wages due under section 6855, to show that such mortgage was given in good faith, not to create a preference among creditors, or to secure a preexisting debt other than upon real estate for the purchase money thereof.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Butler county.

Smith, J.

We are of the opinion that under the facts disclosed in the bill of exceptions, it was incumbent on the plaintiff in error on the trial of the court of common pleas, in addition to the production of the note and chattel mortgage, which was executed ’ to them by the assignor, a few *277days before the assignment, to show that such mortgage was obtained in good faith, and was not given to create a preference among creditors, or to secure a pre-existing debt, other than upon real estate for the purchase-money thereof. The first clause of section 6355, provides that 1 ‘every person who shall have performed any labor as an operative in the service of the assignor shall be entitled to receive out of the trust funds, before the payment of other creditors, the full amount of the wages due to such person for such labor performed within twelve months preceding the assignment, not exceeding $300.00. And it was conceded that the operatives in this case who were preferred to the mortgage claim, came within this provision. It is then stated in the succeeding part of the section that the foregoing provisions shall not in any way affect securities given or liens obtained in good faith,.for value, but that judgments, by confession on warrants of attorney, rendered within two months prior to the assignment, or securities given within such time to create a preference among creditors, or to secure a pre-existing debt, other than upon real estate for the purchase money thereof, shall be of no force or validity as against such claims for labor to the extent above provided, in case of assignment.” It would seem, therefore, that where it appears that operatives have such a claim, that the mere production of a note or mortgagegivenwithintwomonthspriorto the assignment, without any proof that it was obtained in good faith, or was not given to create a preference among creditors or to secure a pre-existing debt, is not sufficient to entitle it to priority over the claims of such operatives. The judgment of the common pleas will therefore be affirmed.

Morey, *Andrews &*Morey, Attorneys for Plaintiff in Error.

*P. G.*Berry, Attorney for Defendant in Error.
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Mark D. Fischer-Colbrie, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 ofAdeza Biomedical Corporation;
2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;
4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
 (b)  [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release 33-8238];
 (c)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and
 (d)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
 (a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and
 (b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.
/s/ Mark D. Fischer-ColbrieMark D. Fischer-Colbrie
#### § 324.61 Purpose and scope.

Sections 324.61 through 324.63 of this subpart establish public disclosure requirements related to the capital requirements described in subpart B of this part for an FDIC-supervised institution with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more as reported on the FDIC-supervised institution's most recent year-end Call Report that is not an advanced approaches FDIC-supervised institution making public disclosures pursuant to § 324.172. An advanced approaches FDIC-supervised institution that has not received approval from the FDIC to exit parallel run pursuant to § 324.121(d) is subject to the disclosure requirements described in §§ 324.62 and 324.63. An FDIC-supervised institution with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more as reported on the FDIC-supervised institution's most recent year-end Call Report that is not an advanced approaches FDIC-supervised institution making public disclosures subject to § 324.172 must comply with § 324.62 unless it is a consolidated subsidiary of a bank holding company, savings and loan holding company, or depository institution that is subject to the disclosure requirements of § 324.62 or a subsidiary of a non-U.S. banking organization that is subject to comparable public disclosure requirements in its home jurisdiction. For purposes of this section, total consolidated assets are determined based on the average of the FDIC-supervised institution's total consolidated assets in the four most recent quarters as reported on the Call Report; or the average of the FDIC-supervised institution's total consolidated assets in the most recent consecutive quarters as reported quarterly on the FDIC-supervised institution's Call Report if the FDIC-supervised institution has not filed such a report for each of the most recent four quarters.

[84 FR 35278, July 22, 2019]
#### § 602.12 Fees.

(a) FCA may charge:

(1) For manual searches for records and for review, the pro rated cost of the salary of the employee doing the work.

(2) For computer searches for records, the direct costs of computer search time and supply or material costs.

(3) For each page made by photocopy or similar method, fifteen cents a page, and for other forms of copying, the direct costs.

(4) The direct costs of elective services, such as certifying records as true copies or sending records by special methods.

(b) We will not charge fees when total assessed fees are less than $15.00.

(c) You must pay by personal check, bank draft drawn on a United States bank, or postal money order made payable to the Treasury of the United States.

(d) We treat a request about yourself under Privacy Act fee rules.

(e) The information in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section is presented in the table to this paragraph. Direct costs means the costs FCA incurs in searching for, reviewing, and reproducing documents to respond to a request. Direct costs include pro rated salary and reproduction costs. We will not charge fees when they total less than $15.00.

| Type of fee | Amount of fee |
| --- | --- |
| Manual Search and Review | Pro rated Salary Costs. |
| Computer Search | Direct Costs. |
| Photocopy | $0.15 a page. |
| Other Reproduction Costs | Direct Costs. |
| Elective Services | Direct Costs. |

Fee Amounts Table

(f) We will not assess fees if we fail to comply with any time limit under the FOIA or these regulations, and have not timely notified the requester, in writing, that an unusual circumstance exists. If an unusual circumstance exists, and timely, written notice is given to the requester, we may be excused an additional 10 working days before fees are automatically waived under this paragraph.

(g) If we determine that unusual circumstances apply and more than 5,000 pages are necessary to respond to a request, we may charge fees if we provided a timely, written notice to the requester and discussed with the requester via mail, Email, or telephone (or made at least three good-faith attempts to do so) how the requester could effectively limit the scope of the request.

(h) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances exist, a failure to comply with time limits imposed by these regulations or FOIA shall be excused for the length of time provided by court order.

[64 FR 41770, Aug. 2, 1999, as amended at 81 FR 63366, Sept. 15, 2016]
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Republic of the Marshall Islands Constitution Day

# 									Republic of the Marshall Islands Constitution Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

April 30, 2024

On behalf of the Government of the United States of America, I congratulate the citizens of the Republic of the Marshall Islands as you celebrate your 45th Constitution Day on May 1.

Our unique friendship and cooperation with the Republic of the Marshall Islands is the foundation of our shared vision for a free, open, resilient, and flourishing Pacific Islands region. We are excited to continue this unique friendship and look forward to next steps for our new agreements related to the Compact of Free Association.

We appreciate the Republic of the Marshall Islands’ leadership on environmental protection and are committed to working together to combat the climate crisis, while partnering with the Pacific Islands in adapting to and managing the impacts of climate change on lives, health, and livelihoods. We also will work together to support their leadership on gender equality issues within the Pacific.

Together, we will continue our cooperation on the security, economic development, public health, and climate resilience of the Marshall Islands.

I send my warmest wishes to all people of the Marshall Islands, at home and abroad.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsMarshall IslandsOffice of the SpokespersonSecretary TripThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
§ 624.12 Capital. A covered swap entity shall comply with: ( a ) In the case of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, the capital adequacy regulations set forth in part 652 of this chapter; and
( b ) In the case of any Farm Credit System institution other than the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, the capital regulations set forth in parts 615 and 628 of this chapter.
[80 FR 74913, Nov. 30, 2015, as amended at 81 FR 49779, July 28, 2016]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE

BULLETIN 1028-U
PLATE 81

|'52°30'

4 52°20"

DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY, NAVY, AND AIR FORCE
173°20' 25° 30° 35’ 40" 173°45'
f oO T a I T i a T
EXPLANATION g TR AIT
Oak __Krugloi
SEDIMENTARY AND EXTRUSIVE ROCKS INTRUSIVE ROCKS GA qT T U AS.25 Point
A 7
ita
Qal ue | = Patricia Point 4
Alluvium and beach deposits <s Dacite porphyry < :
i Not shown on sections 3 > E Patricia Biot
SE I Z
E s& Diabase and gabbro
= Krugloi Formation &
3 TMck, undifferentiated; includes < ————
g bedded argillite, siltstone, and = Contact
=
S chert & Dashed where approximately located
| § TMekb, lava; chiefly basaltic and i
spilitic FE ————E
| = Tekt, tuff and tuff-agglomerate eS eg
al TMukc, conglomerate ro Fault |
BY Dashed where approximately located;
§ ce) short dashed where fracture or
g 3° fault is inferred from aerial photo-
= N graphs; dotted where concealed;
5 Basement rocks ie} U, upthrown side; D, downthrown
& Tau, undifferentiated tH side. Arrows indicate strike-slip Monolith Point
SS Tw, lava ‘movement TWekb
‘Tet, tuff and tuff-agglomerate = 2 cg
TMxc, conglomerate, argillite, silt- . q 0
L stone, and chert 2 Strike and dip of beds ang Cove
| P
Armeria Point
vasn 2 ARMERIA BAY McDonald Point
a TMekb
‘ West Cove
25"! -f- 25’
Gillon Point
ae
OTKRITI BAY
O C B Cape Sabak
A LV lay
| Q
a
| 9 Qkont tsiana
52°20" L. — L _ - le __1 —L !
173920" 25 30 35° 40’ 173°45"
Base from U.S. Geological Survey, = SCALE 1:63 360 Geology by Olcott Gates, H. A. Powers,
Attu 1:250,000, 1953 fT r z 3 4 MILES R. E. Wilcox, J. P. Schafer, and
Al = a] F. M. Byers Jr; 1949-50
ele oO 1 2 3 a KILOMETERS
EH DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
SHORELINE SHOWN REPRESENTS THE APPROXIMATE LINE OF MEAN HIGH WATER
APeROXMATE MEAN
cecuMamion 1971
A A’ B B’
2000’ 2000’ 4 2000' 2000
1000° 1000' 4 1000’ 1000'
SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL — ‘SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL
1000' 1000’ + 1000° 1000°
2000' 2000’ + 2000’ 2000'
3000' 3000’ + 3000' 3000'

D
2000’
‘000!
e09 Td
SEA LEVEL
1000°
2000'
3000’
c “
F F’ G @ a H’
2000' 2000° 2000° 2000’ 2000' g 2000'
1000" Ta Tet Td. Td ray 1000" 1000" aT 1000" 1000" q Srl tg fa 1000'
SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL SEA LEVEL
1000’ 1000° 1000° 1000’ 1000' 1000°
2000' 2000' 2000° 2000° 2000° 2000'
3000! 3000’ 3000’ 3000’ 3000° 3000’

GEOLOGIC MAP

INTERIOR— GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, WASHINGTON, D.C.— 1971—G69293

AND SECTIONS OF AGATTU, NEAR ISLANDS, ALASKA