alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Carol A. Leo *vs.*Arthur A. Armington *et al.*

MAY 25, 1948.

Present: Flynn, C. J., Capotosto, Baker, Condon and O’Connell, JJ.

Per Curiam.

This is a bill in equity for the construction of the will of Simon W. Wardwell, late of the city of Providence. The cause apparently being ready for hearing for final decree in the superior court was certified to this court for our determination in accordance with the provisions of general laws 1938, chapter 545, §7. An examination of the record, however, discloses that a charitable trust created by the will is involved and may be affected by a final determination of the questions presented, .at least as to the amount that may ultimately be available for charitable purposes; and that the attorney general has not been made a party to this proceeding.

It is well settled in this state that the attorney general is the representative of the interests of the public under *125charitable trusts and that he should be 'made a party in any suit in which the existence or the validity of such a trust is in question or wherein the administration of such a trust is involved. *Newport Hospital*v. *Harvey,*47 R. I. 382; *Powers*v. *Home for Aged Women,*55 R. I. 187.

*Fred Brosco,*for complainant.

*John L. Curran,*for respondent trustees, *Sherwood & Clifford, Sidney Clifford,*for respondents Adelina C. L. Appleton, Catherine S. Meyer and Theresa Shea.'

In our opinion the administration of a charitable trust is involved in the instant cause and the attorney general, in accordance with the rule above stated, should be made a party respondent before we finally determine the cause as certified.

Accordingly the papers in the cause are remanded to the superior court with direction that a suitable order be entered making the attorney general a party respondent and giving him an opportunity to enter an appearance, to file an answer and to take such other steps as he may desire within the times fixed therefor by the superior court; and thereupon that the. cause be recertified under the statute to this court for final determination thereof.
Fill in this information to identify your case:

Debtor 1 Rhonda R. Johnson

First Name Middle Name Last Name

Debtor 2

(Spouse if, filing) First Name Middle Name Last Name

United States Bankruptcy Court for the: NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case number

(if known)  Check if this an

amended filing

B 103A 

Application for Individuals to Pay the Filing Fee in Installments 12/15

Be as complete and accurate as possible. If two married people are filing together, both are equally responsible for supplying correct

information.

Part 1: Specify Your Proposed Payment Timetable

1. Which chapter of the Bankruptcy Code are

you choosing to file under?

 Chapter 7

 Chapter 11

 Chapter 12

 Chapter 13

2. You may apply to pay the filing fee in up to

four installments. Fill in the amounts you

propose to pay and the dates you plan to

pay them. Be sure all dates are business

days. Then add the payments you propose

to pay. $ 83.75

 With the filing of the petition

 On or before this date.........

MM / DD/ YYYY

You must propose to pay the entire fee no

later than 120 days after you file this $ 83.75 On or before this date........... 9/14/16

bankruptcy case. If the court approves your MM / DD/ YYYY

application, the court will set your final $ 83.75 On or before this date........... 10/14/16

payment timetable. MM / DD/ YYYY

+ $ 83.75 On or before this date........... 11/13/16

MM / DD/ YYYY

$

335.00

Total Your total must equal the entire fee for the chapter you checked in line 1.

Part 2: Sign Below

By signing here, you state that you are unable to pay the full filing fee at once, that you want to pay the fee in installments, and that you

understand that:

•

You must pay your entire filing fee before you make any more payments or transfer any more property to an attorney, bankruptcy petition

preparer, or anyone else for services in connection with your bankruptcy case.

•

You must pay the entire fee no later than 120 days after you first file for bankruptcy, unless the court later extends your deadline. Your

debts will not be discharged until your entire fee is paid.

•

If you do not make any payment when it is due, your bankruptcy case may be dismissed, and your rights in other bankruptcy proceedings

may be affected.

X /s/ Rhonda R. Johnson X X /s/ Jeffry A Dahlberg

Rhonda R. Johnson Jeffry A Dahlberg

Signature of Debtor 1 Signature of Debtor 2 Your attorney’s name and signature, if you used one

Date August 10, 2016 Date Date August 10, 2016

MM / DD / YYYY MM / DD / YYYY MM/ DD / YYYY

You propose to pay...

B 103A (Official Form 103A) Application for Individuals to Pay the Filing Fee in Installments

Software Copyright (c) 1996-2016 Best Case, LLC - www.bestcase.com Best Case Bankruptcy

Case 16-81936 Doc 2 Filed 08/15/16 Entered 08/15/16 13:28:00 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
#### EDWIN ROSS *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

(AC 18700)

Spear, Hennessy and Mihalakos, Js.

Argued December 3, 1999

officially released April 11, 2000

*James A. Shanley, Jr.,*special public defender, for the appellant (petitioner).

*James M. Ralls,*assistant state’s attorney, with whom, on the brief, was *Patricia A. Swords,*state’s attorney, for the appellee (respondent).

*Opinion*

PER CURIAM.

In the underlying criminal proceeding, the petitioner, Edwin Ross, pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the first degree and two charges of robbery in the first degree, and received a total effective sentence of thirty years incarceration. In his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner alleges that trial counsel was ineffective in assisting him in that he failed (1) to inform the petitioner that he could not be convicted of the crime of felony murder if he had *311not participated in the commission of the underlying felony of robbery, (2) to investigate the case adequately in that his codefendant, Ebony Casey, would have provided testimony that would have exonerated the petitioner, (3) to inform the petitioner that he had a right to testify on his own behalf and (4) to provide the petitioner adequate time to consider his plea and, therefore, coerced him into pleading guilty. The habeas court denied the petition and the petitioner’s petition for certification to appeal.

The habeas court’s denial of the petitioner’s petition was predicated on a factual review of the petitioner’s claim and a determination that trial counsel was more credible than the petitioner and Casey. The court concluded that the petitioner had failed to rebut the strong presumption that “counsel’s conduct [fell] within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance . . . *Safford*v. *Warden,*223 Conn. 180, 193, 612 A.2d 1161 (1992).

After a review of the record and briefs and after hearing oral arguments, we conclude that the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing that he has been denied a state or federal constitutional right and, further, that he has failed to sustain his burden of persuasion that the denial of certification to appeal was a clear abuse of discretion or that an injustice has been done. See *Simms*v. *Warden,*230 Conn. 608, 612, 646 A.2d 126 (1994); *Simms*v. *Warden,*229 Conn. 178, 189, 640 A.2d 601 (1994); *Walker v. Commissioner of Correction,*38 Conn. App. 99, 100, 659 A.2d 195, cert. denied, 234 Conn. 920, 661 A.2d 100 (1995); see also *Lozada*v. *Deeds,*498 U.S. 430, 431-32, 111 S. Ct. 860, 112 L. Ed. 2d 956 (1991).

We conclude that the habeas court had before it sufficient evidence to find as it did and that it did not abuse *312its discretion in denying the petitioner’s petition for certification to appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, John Chymboryk, the Chief Executive Officer of Reddi Brake Supply Corporation (the ACompany@), certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 annual report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;



4.  I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and I 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 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 report (the "Evaluation Date"); and



c) presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



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. I have indicated in this 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 my most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: October 6, 2003                                                 By: /s/ John Chymboryk

John Chymboryk

Chief Executive Officer
- COPS Office Photo Contest – April Winner
        - The Pillars of 21st Century  Youth-focused Policing
        - Operation Conversation: Cops & Kids
        - Arizona Interdiction for the Protection of Children Program
        - 2016 COPS Office Solicitations

Subscribe

 The Beat

 Learning

 Archives

### Operation Conversation: Cops & Kids

In Operation  Conversation: Cops & Kids workshops, inner-city  youth from some of New York City’s toughest neighborhoods and police officers  from the New  York City Police Department (NYPD) meet to engage in  conversations as well as performance and improvisation to foster positive  interactions and a deeper understanding of the challenges and stressors of both  groups. At Police Athletic League (PAL) centers and other locations around the  city, groups of about 10 officers and 10 young people meet for workshops at  least once a month. Initial concerns and tensions between the officers and  youth lessen as they engage in improvisations and performance with one another. 

     The innovative police-community relations program is  led by Dr. Lenora Fulani, founder of the All Stars Project (ASP) and a community activist who  works to transform the lives of youth and poor communities using the  developmental power of performance. The ASP has a number of performance  programs for youth, but Operation Conversation: Cops & Kids was developed a  decade ago. In 2011, Fulani and the ASP finalized a formal partnership with the  NYPD, and the program is now part of officer training for all NYPD officers.  Twice a year—in July and January—graduates of the most recent NYPD academy  attend a performance of Operation Conversation: Cops & Kids at the Apollo  Theater in Harlem. The most recent performance had more than 500 new officers  and a similar number of community members, seated in alternating rows. After  the performance, community members and officers engage in conversation, which  often includes laughter, some tears, and empathy.

     The creative and innovative program uses performance  and improvisation to engage officers and youth in discussions about the  challenges of living and working in poor, inner-city communities. The workshops  help to break down barriers between young people and NYPD officers to help them  feel more comfortable and lead to stronger positive connections between police  and the community. More information about the program is available at the All Stars Project website and Operation  Conversation: Cops & Kids.

**Back to top**

COPS Office Photo Contest – April Winner | The Pillars of 21st Century  Youth-focused Policing| Operation Conversation: Cops & Kids | Arizona Interdiction for the Protection of Children Program | 2016 COPS Office Solicitations

Privacy PolicyUS. Department of JusticeLegal Policies and DisclaimersAccessibilityNo FEAR ActContact UsFAQslep.govregulations.gov
#### §§ 95.2907-95.2929 [Reserved]
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

In Re: ) BK No.:

)

) Chapter:

)

)

)

Debtor(s) )

Kathy S Grogan

16-27657

13

Eastern Division

Joliet

Honorable Pamela S. Hollis

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AUTHORIZE LOAN MODIFICATION

Having read the MOTION TO AUTHORIZE LOAN MODIFICATION, heard the arguments of

counsel, and found that due notice has been provided, the Court hereby orders as follows:

 The Debtor, Kathy S Grogan, is authorized to modify the mortgage loan securing her real property

located at 2139 Wilson Creek Cir, Aurora, IL 60503 according to the following terms:

Loan Amount not to exceed: $172,280.96

Loan term: 360 months

Loan Rate: 3.750%

Loan Payment: $1,829.27

Honorable Pamela S. Hollis

Enter:

Dated: September 08, 2017 United States Bankruptcy Judge

David H. Cutler, ESQ

Cutler & Associates Ltd.

4131 Main St.

Skokie IL 60076

(847) 673-8600

Prepared by:

Case 16-27657 Doc 35 Filed 09/08/17 Entered 09/08/17 14:09:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 1996 AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         571,156
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,624,675
<ALLOWANCES>                                   560,000
<INVENTORY>                                 24,921,223
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            33,031,284
<PP&E>                                       6,701,516
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,081,225
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              39,926,249
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,190,283
<BONDS>                                      7,840,926
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  9,547,244
<COMMON>                                         1,786
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,879,011
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                39,926,240
<SALES>                                     62,725,488
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            62,725,488
<CGS>                                       36,548,308
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,802,718
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,494,208
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               304,941
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             124,940
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,542,838
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          8,562,836
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,562,836
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.52
        

</TABLE>
**Read more of the December Dispatch**
    - Director’s Corner:              Our Thanks to Those Who Keep Us Safe in Our Communities and On Our Borders
    - The Stockton Police Department: Underlining the ’Community‘ in ’Community Policing‘
    - Keeping Spirits Bright for Cops, Kids, and Communities
    - New from the COPS Office: What’s New in Blue
    - Improving the Identification and Reporting of Hate Crimes
    - Fires and Law Enforcement
    - North Texas Sheriffs Work Together to Reduce Drug Smuggling and Human Trafficking
    - New Law Enforcement Resources for Combating Animal Cruelty
    - Arlington Police App Streamlines Communication between Police and Citizens
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4975 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4975

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 
to exclude changes in tariffs from the paygo scorecard and to amend the 
  Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to exempt 
            changes in tariffs from certain points of order.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 17, 1994

 Mr. Dreier (for himself and Mr. Kolbe) introduced the following bill; 
 which was referred jointly to the Committees on Government Operations 
                               and Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 
to exclude changes in tariffs from the paygo scorecard and to amend the 
  Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to exempt 
            changes in tariffs from certain points of order.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF TARIFF CHANGES ON THE PAYGO SCORECARD.

    Section 252 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act of 1985 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(f) As used in this section, the term `receipts legislation' 
shall not include that part of any implementing bill for any trade 
agreement that changes, eliminates, or establishes any tariff of the 
United States.''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN POINTS OF ORDER.

    (a) Tariff Enabling Legislation Exemption.--Title III of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is amended by adding at the end the 
following new section:

               ``treatment of tariff enabling legislation

    ``Sec. 314. The points of order set forth in sections 303(a), 
311(a)(1), and 605 shall not apply to any implementing bill for any 
trade agreement that changes, eliminates, or establishes any tariff of 
the United States.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections set forth in 
section 1(b) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 
1974 is amended by adding after the item relating to section 313 the 
following new item:

``Sec. 314. Treatment of tariff enabling legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
No. 11-5447.

#### Jaime *v.*Almager, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1


                                CERTIFICATION OF
               CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 I/OMagic
Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Executive
Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to his 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 the
Company.


Dated:  April 9, 2009       By: /s/ TONY SHAHBAZ
                                ------------------------------------------------
                                    Tony Shahbaz
                                    Chief Executive Officer (principal executive
                                    officer) and Acting Chief Financial Officer
                                    (principal financial officer)


         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signatures that appear 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.
#### § 223.213 Humpback whales.

The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1)(A) through 9(a)(1)(G) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1538) relating to endangered species apply to threatened species of the humpback whale listed in § 223.102(e).

[81 FR 62319, Sept. 8, 2016]
Exhibit 23




            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  Celadon  Group,  Inc.
Registration  Statement  333-14641 on Form S-8  pertaining to the Employee Stock
Purchase Plan dated October 23, 1996,  Registration  Statement 333-42209 on Form
S-8 pertaining to the Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan dated December 12,
1997, and Registration Statements 333-42207 and 333-31164 on Form S-8 pertaining
to the 1994 Stock  Option plan dated  December  12, 1997 and  February 25, 2000,
respectively,   of  our  report  dated  July  29,  2004,  with  respect  to  the
consolidated  financial statements and schedule of Celadon Group, Inc., included
in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A  Amendment No. 1 for the year ended June 30,
2004.


                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Indianapolis, Indiana
September 10, 2004
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TIMOTHY SCOTT TURNER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-343

[December 31, 2020]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Charles A. Schwab, 

Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 562015CF003452A and 562015CF003484A.

Timothy Scott Turner, Malone, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jessica L.

Underwood, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., GROSS and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.