alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-2544-16T1

IN THE MATTER OF THE INTER VIVOS

TRUST, GEORGIA L. TILLI a/k/a

LORRAINE TILLI, GRANTOR.

________________________________

Submitted May 2, 2018 – Decided 

Before Judges Nugent and Currier.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, 

Chancery Division, Probate Part, Bergen 

County, Docket No. P-000100-16. 

Jon Tilli, appellant pro se. 

Kridel Law Group, attorneys for respondent 

Janice Paul, Trustee of the Georgia L. Tilli 

a/k/a Lorraine Tilli Irrevocable Living Trust 

(James A. Kridel, Jr. and Anne L. Heldman, on 

the brief).

PER CURIAM

Appellant, Jon Tilli, appeals from the summary judgment 

entered against him in favor of the Georgia L. Tilli a/k/a Lorraine 

Tilli Irrevocable Living Trust (the Trust). The judgment was for 

money appellant borrowed from his mother, decedent Georgia 

"Lorraine" Tilli, and did not repay. In her will, decedent vested 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." 

Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the 

parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

September 4, 2018
2 A-2544-16T1

her residuary estate in the Trust. The Trust documents identified 

numerous loans decedent had made and instructed the Trustee on how 

to treat and collect the loans. 

Appellant's primary arguments in opposition to the summary 

judgment motion were these: the sums of money he received were 

gifts, not loans; the assets securing the loans were owned by the 

estate; and the net estate was undervalued. On appeal, he argues 

the following points:

Point 1

The Trial Court Erred in Granting Summary 

Judgment To Plaintiff. 

Plaintiff Awarded on Assets Pre-Disposed.

Point 2

Plaintiff misrepresent [sic] claim.

Point 3

Plaintiff not seeking repayment of House.

Point 4 

Defendant maintains gifts, not aware of any 

loans.

Deposition.

Point 5

Defendants share of Estates.

Having considered appellant's arguments in light of the 

record and prevailing legal principles, we affirm the judgment, 

substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Robert P. Contillo 

in his written opinion. The competent evidence on the summary 

judgment motion record is so one-sided that plaintiff must prevail 
3 A-2544-16T1

as a matter of law. Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 

N.J. 520, 540 (1995). Appellant's arguments are without sufficient 

merit to warrant further discussion in a written opinion. R.

2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.3**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that this periodicreport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in theperiodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the issuer.

 

 
| Date: May 15, 2009 | Garry P. Herdler              |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------|
|                    | Garry P. Herdler              |
|                    | Executive Vice President  and |
|                    | Chief Financial Officer       |

 

----
#3

NEMA-DOE Meeting on Lamp Codes & Standards Issues

Date: January 21, 2003

Time: 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM

Place: NEMA, 1300 North 17th Street, Suite 1847, Rosslyn, VA

Expected Participants:

Michael McCabe

Ronald Lewis

Brian Card

Bryan Berringer

Edward Levy

DOE

DOE

DOE

DOE

Navigant Cons.

Joe Howley

Peter Bleasby

Al Rousseau

Mark Sharp

Mark Sugaya

Dale Work

Ed Yandek

GE Lighting

OSRAM Sylvania

Philips Lighting

Panasonic

Panasonic

Philips

Hampton Newsome FTC GE Lighting

Craig Updyke NEMA

I. Welcome and Introductions - Joe Howley or Peter Bleasby

II. Follow Up from November 21 Meeting

Reflector (ER/BR) Lamps - NEMA Shipment Data

HID Lamps - NEMA Shipment Data

III. NEMA CFL Efficiency Rulemaking Petition

Ed Levy - Discussion on the Petitioning Process

NEMA Strawman Draft - Discussion

IV. Other Items

 EE-DET-03-001 COMMENT 03
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [Investigation No. 701-TA-581 (Final)]

# AGENCY:

United States International Trade Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        On June 5, 2018, the Department of Commerce published notice in the                         **Federal Register**                         of a negative final determination of subsidies in connection with the subject investigation concerning citric acid and certain citrate salts from Thailand (83 FR 26004). Accordingly, the countervailing duty investigation concerning citric acid and certain citrate salts from Thailand (Investigation No. 701-TA-581 (Final)) is terminated.                    

# DATES:

June 5, 2018.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Amelia Shister (202-205-2047), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (                        *https://www.usitc.gov*).                    

Authority:This investigation is being terminated under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 and pursuant to section 207.40(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.40(a)). This notice is published pursuant to section 201.10 of the Commission's rules (19 CFR 201.10).

By order of the Commission.

 Issued: June 12, 2018.

Lisa Barton,

Secretary to the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2018-12905 Filed 6-14-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 27634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12680]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Restek Corporation

ACTION: Notice of application.

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

DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and 
applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the 
issuance of the proposed registration on or before July 13, 2018. Such 
persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the 
application on or before July 13, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement 
Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 
8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for 
hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: 
Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All 
request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement 
Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, 
Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, 
Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, 
Springfield, Virginia 22152.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Attorney General has delegated his 
authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of 
the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority 
to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation 
and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of 
manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of 
controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with 
suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated 
to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division 
(``Assistant Administrator'') pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, 
appendix to subpart R.
    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on 
February 20, 2018, Restek Corporation, 110 Benner Cr., Bellefonte, PA 
16823 applied to be registered as an importer of the Schedule I 
controlled substance Tetrahydrocannibinols (7370).
    The company plans to import the controlled substance in bulk for 
the manufacture of analytical reference material which, in its final 
form, is an exempted product.

    Dated: June 6, 2018.
John J. Martin,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-12680 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
#### The AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, a Connecticut corporation, and H. L. Coble Construction Company, a North Carolina corporation, Appellants, v. The CITY OF ORLANDO, a municipal corporation created by and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, Smith and Gillespie Engineers, Inc., a Florida corporation, Wylie W. Gillespie, John Doe and Richard Roe, Appellees.

Nos. 69-66, 69-67.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 8, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
" 

# • SPA 15 RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 133: Standards Applicable to Owners and Operators (cont'd) RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 133 Letter of Credit Revision



### 59 FR

### 29958-29960 June 

### 10, 1994 (RCRA Cluster VI, non-HSWA provisions)
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FEDERAL RCRA CITATION ANALOGOUS STATE CITATION WAC 173·303- STATE ANALOG IS: EQUIV- LESS MORE BROADER ALENT STRIN· STRIN- IN SCOPE GENT GENT PART 

### 264- STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUSWASTETREATMENT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES SUBPART H - FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS WORDING OF THE INSTRUMENTS 

### t after "published" 

### 264.151(d) 

### 620(10) X insert "and copyrighted" after "published" 

### 264.151(k) 620(10) X insert "and copyrighted"



# •
DCL133.15 - Revised: 07/07/94 Printed: 7/29/98 June 

### 10, 1994- Page 

### 1 of 

### 1
#### ANDERSON-OBLER, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Mr. and Mrs. Norman KASSER, Appellees.

No. 72-1209.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 30, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
Thousands Of Government Jobs In Your Area Are Looking To Hire lmmedlalely! 

First Name Last Name 

Email Address Phone Number 

This website is not affiliated with the United States Government. 

voi.!~'ytt.aiya,i.are:c.;..s~__rto1ti¥U'-=.~u' ·.; a-~yo..,~toL~-f!;f'fflSa.....:ror.:.tM"Sr~~Y~) ~ S_y ~~;te.$.Ul)l'l\;tb-.>tto&-.:'w'>'~ 1/0Ugi ~e.lllc:xp.y±r-.ci": vo.tr~t1D~aubrfr3~ ~~....ogyKtW).'O'.. nt!'~ 

~n.c.-mb£:!'a.oo\e c,c.~iyc;u,V!i-'le: :Tium-~· y ...J.Jt".:e~tHidtl'.il~ca::s- be-1$~~,;;.~.i:---oo!l.:4 c;a~r- mr,c:,-"; ~H1l::.a'if ,ega, i".:!h:.tr'-:s.e'VK"e:S.ar<.1U-atl'O'l';e---,et,eq;,redtDJ;:-OY.::.;Jh-t:oor.~1 ~~k,rac,e,ve. 

=~JC:e$- r10e ti: lJ'/ ck-:;~ ·a:
**Exhibit 21**

 

Subsidiaries.

 

**THQ Inc.**

 
| Genetic Anomalies, Inc.             |   | Delaware       |
|-------------------------------------|--------|----------------|
| Pacific Coast Power & Light Co. |   | California     |
| Rainbow Multimedia Group, Inc.      |   | Arizona        |
| THQ Asia Pacific Pty. Ltd.          |   | Australia      |
| THQ Australia Studios Pty. Ltd.     |   | Australia      |
| THQ Entertainment GmbH              |   | Germany        |
| THQ France Sarl                     |   | France         |
| THQ (Holdings) Ltd.                 |   | United Kingdom |
| THQ Korea Ltd.                      |   | Korea          |
| THQ UK Limited                      |   | United Kingdom |
| THQ Wireless Inc.                   |   | Delaware       |
| THQ Wireless Cayman Inc.            |   | Cayman Islands |
| THQ Wireless International Sarl     |   | Luxembourg     |
| THQ Wireless Singapore PTE LTD      |   | Singapore      |
| Volition, Inc.                      |   | Delaware       |

 

----
#### LEASING ASSOCIATES, INC., Appellant, v. Ben WHITEHOUSE et al., Appellees.

No. 72-1312.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 20, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 4.3

CAP

INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

THIS CERTIFICATE IS TRANSFERABLE

IN CANTON, MA, JERSEY CITY, NJ

AND NEW YORK CITY, NY

SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS

CUSIP 14073T 10 9



This Certifies that

is the record holder of

FULLY PAID AND NONASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK, $.01 PAR VALUE, OF

transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person
or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly
endorsed. This certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer
Agent and registered by the Registrar.

WITNESS the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of
its duly authorized officers.

Dated:

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



Countersigned and Registered:

EQUISERVE TRUST COMPANY, N.A.

Transfer Agent

and Registrar

BY

Authorized SIGNATURE

---

The Corporation shall furnish without charge to each stockholder
who so requests a statement of the powers, designations, preferences and
relative, participating, optional, or other special rights of each class of
stock of the Corporation or series thereof and the qualifications, limitations
or restrictions of such preferences and/or rights. Such requests shall be made
to the Corporation's Secretary at the principal office of the Corporation.

The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this
certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full
according to applicable laws or regulations:

TEN COM - as tenants in common

TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties

JT TEN - as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in
common



UNIF GIFT MIN ACT-......................Custodian......................

(Cust) (Minor)

under Uniform Gifts to Minors

Act.......................................................

(State)

UNIF TRF MIN ACT-.................Custodian (until age...........)

(Cust)

.......................under Uniform Transfers

(Minor)

to Minors Act.......................................

(State)

For Value Received, hereby sell(s), assign(s) and transfer(s) unto

PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE

(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF
ASSIGNEE)

Shares

of the common stock represented by the within certificate, and do hereby
irrevocably constitute and appoint

Attorney

to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with
full power of substitution in the premises.

Dated

X

X

THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN
UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR
ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.

Signature(s) Guaranteed

By





THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION
(BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH
MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO
S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.

---
**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**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of First Real Estate Investment Trust
      of
      New Jersey (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2006
      (the “Report”), I, Robert S. Hekemian, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
      Officer of the Company, do hereby 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, 15 U.S.C. § 78m(a) or 78o(d), 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:
                June 8, 2006
            /s/
                Robert S. HekemianRobert
                S. HekemianChairman
                of the Board and Chief Executive
                Officer
#### Robert Berry, Respondent, *vs.*Philo L. Smith, Appellant.

1. *Practice,civil*— Exceptions—Reversal—Where no exceptions are taken to the rulings of the lower court, this court will not reverse the ease on the ground of such rulings.

*Appeal from Cape Girardeau Court of Common Pleas.*

*Louis*Houck, for Appellant.

*J. Me*Williams, for Respondent.

"Wagner, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The only complaint made is, in regard to the action of the court in refusing to grant a change of venue on the application of the defendant. *

When the court overruled the application, the record states, that the defendant presented his bill of exceptions; but it does not appear that he did except to the ruling. So, when the motion for a new trial was overruled, no exceptions were taken to the decision at all; there is, therefore, nothing saved for this court to consider.

Judgment affirmed.

The other judges concur, except Sherwood J., absent.
Concurring Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson

Amazon.com, Inc.

No. 1923128

March 28, 2023

On March 28, 2023, before I departed from the FTC, the Commission voted to refer a

complaint to the Department of Justice against Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Digital Services

LLC, and A2Z Development Center, Inc. The proposed complaint alleges that Amazon, as part

of its Alexa voice assistant services, violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, the Children’s Online

Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”), and the COPPA Rule. My support for the complaint

recommendation is premised primarily on the alleged COPPA violations.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 26, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00509

- CR

Malcolm GANDY,

Appell ant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR6350

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Court Reporter Mary Beth Sasala has not filed the reporter’s record on appellant’s pre

trial hearing on a motion to suppress , upon which this appeal is based . Appellant’s notice of

appeal, filed on August 5, 2016 , attests the record was transcribed and Sasala was paid.

It is therefore ORDERED that Mary Beth Sasala file the reporter’s record no later than

September 30, 201 6

. No extensions of time will be allowed

.

_________________________________ Jason Pulliam, Justice

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

court on this 26th day of Septembe r, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Petitioner-Appellee,

 v.

JAMES W. WITT,

Respondent-Appellant.

No. 15-16721

D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00418-LJO-SAB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 14, 2017**

Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 

James W. Witt appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting the 

Internal Revenue Service’s (“IRS”) petition to enforce a summons. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for clear error the district court’s 

summons-enforcement decision. United States v. Richey, 632 F.3d 559, 563 (9th 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

FEB 27 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-16721 

Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court did not clearly err by granting the petition because the 

United States met its burden of establishing its prima facie case for enforcement of 

the IRS summons, and Witt failed to rebut that showing. See United States v. 

Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964) (setting forth requirements for establishing a 

prima facie case for enforcement, and explaining that the burden is on the taxpayer 

to show an abuse of the process); United States v. Dynavac, Inc., 6 F.3d 1407, 

1414 (9th Cir. 1993) (once a prima facie case is made a heavy burden is placed on 

the taxpayer to show an abuse of process or the lack of institutional good faith).

We reject as without merit Witt’s contentions that the district court was 

biased and violated his due process rights. 

Witt’s motion filed on April 21, 2016, is denied.

AFFIRMED.
#### HARRIS v. RENTSCHLER.

No. 38108.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 215 So.2d 796.
#### CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, a Florida municipal corporation, Appellant, v. H. 0. LASSETER, Sr., et al., Appellees.

No. 71-363.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 14, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 20, 1972.

Joseph A. Wanick, City Atty. and Lionel Barnet, Asst. City Atty., for appellant.

Stuart Simon, County Atty. and Joseph Komansky, Asst. County Atty.; Burnett Roth, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Berkman v. Miami National Bank, Fla.App. 1962, 143 So.2d 535.