alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### HOLIDAY AIR ASSOCIATES, INC., Appellant, v. AERO TIRE COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, and John T. Clark, d/b/a Clark Aircraft Service, Appellees.

No. 76-630.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 6, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 16, 1978.

*586Walsh, Kahn & Gustafson and Mark R. Boyd, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Brigham & Brigham and Dana P. Brigham, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and HAVER-FIELD and HUBBART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, Holiday Air Associates, in this negligence action seeking to recover damages to its aircraft after a crash-landing, appeals a summary judgment entered in favor of defendant, John T. Clark.

Holiday Air is the owner of a Cessna 402-A airplane which was forced to crash-land resulting in extensive damage to the aircraft. The alleged cause of the crash was the installation of improperly recapped tires which did not meet the manufacturer’s specifications as to size and quality; when the tires were mounted on the aircraft their bulk would not permit the main landing gear of the aircraft to be properly retracted and lowered. Holiday filed the instant action for damages against John T. Clark and others alleging that Clark, who is a certified mechanic, negligently installed the tires on the Cessna and failed to conduct a wheel retraction test. Clark answered generally denying the material allegations of the complaint. Subsequently, Clark filed a motion for summary judgment attaching a stipulation for compromise and settlement1 by which he claimed Holiday had released him from all claims and demands. After a hearing, the trial judge entered the summary judgment for Clark. We reverse.

After an examination of the record and the stipulation, we conclude that there remain questions of fact as to whether or not the stipulation released Clark from liability with respect to the issues raised by the present law suit. Thus, the summary judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. See *Holl*v. *Talcott,*191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966).

Reversed and remanded.

1

. It appears that this stipulation which was approved by court order resulted from a prior suit brought by Clark against Holiday Air and others.
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-15(e) and 15d-15 (e) AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Michael Shahbazian, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Niku Corporation;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 (e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:



(a) designed such disclosure controls
and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data; and



(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                          |  |                        
|------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: September 13, 2004 |  | /s/ MICHAEL SHAHBAZIAN 
|                          |  | Michael Shahbazian     
|                          |  | Chief Financial Officer
### Water-supply characteristics of North Carolina streams

By: Grover Cleveland Goddard

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1761

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### Harry MAUTNER, Personal Representative of the Estate of Lawrence L. Garbett, Deceased, Appellant, v. Janis Garbett LOMAN, Donna L. Garbett and Allen R. Garbett, Appellees.

No. 76-1876.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 20, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 16, 1978.

Sibley, Giblin, Levenson & Glaser and Alan M. Glaser, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Shorenstein & Lewis, Miami Beach, Arthur Addess, Tendrich & Todd, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and NATHAN and HUBBART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Harry Mautner, as personal representative of the Estate of Lawrence L. Garbett, deceased, appeals from an order of the Probate Division of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida. Said order granted appellees/claimants’ motion for extension of time to file independent lawsuits against the estate, pursuant to Section 733.705(3), Florida Statutes.

After carefully reviewing the record, briefs and argument of counsel, it is our opinion that the presumption of correctness attached to the Probate Court’s order has not been overcome, as appellant has failed to demonstrate any abuse of the probate judge’s discretion in granting the aforementioned extension of time. See *Turner v. Myers,*332 So.2d 635 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sierra Resource Group, Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarter  ending  March 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Sandra J. Andre, President and Chief Executive 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 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.


Date: April 27, 2006



                                        By: /s/ SANDRA J. ANDRE
                                            ___________________________
                                                Sandra J. Andre
                                                President and
                                                Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 48811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24599]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Vermont Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Vermont Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 1:45 
p.m. and adjourn at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 14, 1997, at the Blue 
Cross-Blue Shield of Vermont, 1 East Road, Montpelier, Vermont 05401. 
The purpose of the meeting is to continue project planning in 
preparation for the November community forum on racial harassment in 
Vermont public schools.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Committee Chairperson Kimberly B. 
Cheney, 802-229-0334, or Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern Regional 
Office, 202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired persons who 
will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language 
interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least five (5) 
working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, September 11, 1997.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 97-24599 Filed 9-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
**Exhibit 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.333-2914 and No. 333-71342 on Form S-8, No. 333-71340 and No. 333-57281 on Form S-3 and No.333-120769 on Form S-3 of Minorplanet Systems USA, Inc. (the “Company”) of our report datedNovember 7, 2003 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphsconcerning the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, the adoption of SFAS No. 145, andthe application of procedures relating to certain reclassifications and disclosures of financialstatement amounts related to the 2001 and 2000 financial statements that were audited byother auditors who have ceased operations), appearing in this Annual Report onForm 10-K of the Company for the year ended August 31, 2005.***DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP*****Dallas, TX**
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 181 (Thursday, September 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 49032]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24800]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Research, Evaluation and Communication; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Research, Evaluation and 
Communication.
    Date and time: October 9, 1997; 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. October 
10, 1997; 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Place: Rooms 320, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of meeting: Closed.
    Contact person: Dr. Christopher Dede, Senior Program Director, 
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 855, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone 
(703) 306-1651.
    Purpose of meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals and provide advice and 
recommendations as part of the selection process for proposals 
submitted to the Career Program.
    Reason for closing: Because the proposals reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with 
proposals, the meetings are closed to the public. These matters are 
within exemptions (4) and (6) of 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), Government in the 
Sunshine Act.

    Dated: September 12, 1997.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-24800 Filed 9-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
#### Charles Franklin GIBSON v. STATE.

No. 38777.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of USANi LLC for the quarter ended March 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         295,435
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  306,605
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    404,921
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,071,400
<PP&E>                                         164,425
<DEPRECIATION>                                  52,405
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,036,289
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          664,831
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,213,378
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,036,289
<SALES>                                        617,889
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               617,889
<CGS>                                          346,153
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  346,153
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               189,893
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,378
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                128,996
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,883
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            127,299
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   127,299
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
NO. 07-05-0168-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	MAY 31, 2005

	______________________________

	MICHAEL RAY DIAZ, APPELLANT

	V.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

	NO. 48,940-C; HONORABLE PATRICK PIRTLE, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

	ORDER ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

	Appellant Michael Ray Diaz has appealed his conviction and sentence following his felony conviction for indecency/sexual assault of a child and assessment of punishment that includes a sentence of life confinement.  A copy of a notice of appeal was filed with this Court on May 2, 2005. The clerk’s record and reporter’s record have not been filed.  Pending before this Court is a motion to withdraw filed by appointed counsel W. Brooks Barfield, Jr., who represented appellant at trial, in which counsel states he was not appointed to represent appellant on appeal.

	The trial court has the responsibility for appointing counsel to represent indigent defendants, as well as the authority to relieve or replace counsel.  Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 1.051(d), 26.04(j)(2) (Vernon 2005 & Supp. 2004).  See also Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex.App.–Waco 1999, no pet.).  Accordingly, we now abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.  Tex. R. App. P. 43.6. 

	Upon remand the trial court shall immediately conduct such hearings as may be necessary to determine the following, causing proper notice of any such hearing to be given: 

     1.    whether counsel's motion to withdraw should be granted; and if so, 

     2.	whether appellant still desires to prosecute this appeal and is indigent and entitled to appointed counsel. 

	Should it be determined that appellant desires to continue the appeal, then the trial court shall also take such measures as may be necessary to assure appellant effective assistance of counsel, which measures may include the appointment of new counsel.  If new counsel is appointed, the name, address, telephone number, and state bar number of counsel shall be included in the order appointing new counsel. 

	The trial court shall execute findings of fact, conclusions of law, and such orders as the court may enter regarding the aforementioned issues and cause its findings and conclusions to be included in a supplemental clerk's record.  A supplemental reporter's record of any hearing shall also be included in the appellate record.  The trial court shall file the supplemental clerk's record and the supplemental reporter's record with the Clerk of this Court by June 22, 2005.  Finally, if new counsel is appointed, appellant's brief will be due within 30 days after the deadline for filing of the supplemental clerk's record and the supplemental reporter's record and the State's brief will be due within 30 days thereafter.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a) & (b). 

	It is so ordered. 

                                               				Per Curiam 

Do not publish.
J~~~ ED STqT

~

S 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

o~

e WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

0

~ _ ;vTql PROI ~G~ 

ullG 20 20 ~ 3 

Mr. J. R. Stroble 

Manager, National TRU Program 

Carlsbad Field Office 

U.S. Department of Energy 

P.O. Box 3090 

Carlsbad, NM 88221-3090 

Dear Mr. Stroble: 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

On May 30, 2013, the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) requested that the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) approve, as a Tier 1(T1) change, the addition of Waste Stream SR-RH-221H.01 

(companion remote-handled (RH) waste stream of contact-handled waste stream SR-W027-221 H-HET) 

to the baseline approval for the remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) waste program at the Savannah 

River Site (SRS). The enclosed report (EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49; II-A4-177) discusses EPA's 

evaluation of pertinent information and our approval. As a result, SRS may dispose of this waste stream 

at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). 

EPA conducted a Baseline Inspection of the CCP (Central Characterization Project) RH TRU waste 

characterization program at SRS in 2011. The April 2012 SRS baseline final inspection report (see EPA 

Docket No. A-98-49; II-A4-161) documents EPA's approval of the processes for RH transuranic (TRU) 

debris waste streams. Based on the results of the current evaluation, EPA approves the T1 change 

consistent with the limitations specified in the enclosed report. EPA's approval addresses the 15 drums 

of TRU waste that are the subject of this T1 change approval. However, this approval also includes any 

additional drums that are added to Waste Stream SR-RH-221 H.O 1 in the future, provided they are 

characterized using the same processes. 

If you have any questions regarding this approval, please contact Rajani Joglekar at (202) 343-9462 or 

Ed Feltcorn at (202) 343-9422. 

Sincerely, 

Tom Peake, Director 

Center for Waste Management and Regulations 

Enclosure 

Intemet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable 0 Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
cc: Electronic Distribution 

Doug Tonkay, DOE EM 

Alton Harris, DOE EM 

Joe Franco, CBFO 

Marcus Pinzel, CBFO NTP 

Tom Morgan, CBFO NTP 

Irene Joo, WTS-CCP 

Mark Pearcy, WTS-CCP 

Trais Klphuis, NMED 

Raymond Lee, EPA HQ 

Site Documents
#### United Fuel Gas Co. *v.*The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.

*Supreme court*— Application *for rehearing*— Judgment *rendered at former term*— Jurisdiction *to rehear case.*

(No. 16634

Decided March 13, 1923.)

Error to the Public Utilities Commission.

On Rehearing.

*Mr. L. K. Lang don; 'Mr. J. W. Heintsman; Mr. R. G. Altizer*and *Mr. A. R. Johnson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John G. Price,*attorney general, and *Mr. E. E. Corn,*for defendant in error.

*Mr. O. E. Irish,*city *solicitor; Mr. L. R. Andrews*and *Messrs. Stricher &*Johnson, for City of Iron-ton.

This cause came again on to be heard upon the transcript of the public utilities commission, a rehearing, *sua sponte,*having been granted December 15, 1922. Upon consideration whereof, the judgment herein having been rendered at a former term, to-wit, July 5, 1921 [108 Ohio St., 168, 132 N. E., 845], and a rehearing upon application of plaintiff in error having been denied on September 27, 1921, the court finds that it has not jurisdiction to rehear said cause.

*Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.*

Marshall, C. J., Wanamaker, Robinson, Jones, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 8, 2016

No. 04-16-00544-CV

IN RE James B. MCCOY

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Relators filed this petition for writ of mandamus on August 24, 2016. On September 1, 

2016, Respondent filed a response which advised that the issue raised by the mandamus petition 

has become moot. Accordingly, this original mandamus proceeding is DISMISSED AS MOOT. 

It is so ORDERED on September 8, 2016.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 8th day of September, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2016-CI-08270, styled James B. McCoy v. Patrick Camacho, pending in 

the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr. presiding.