alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Josephine Matteo, Claimant, *v.*State of New York, Defendant.

(Claim No. 31160.)

Court of Claims,

October 10, 1952.

*524
      *Sol Greenberg*for claimant.

*Nathaniel L. Goldstein, Attorney-General (Edward L. Book-stein*of counsel), for defendant.

Sylvester, J.

Upon this motion for leave to file a claim, it appears that claimant’s attorney filed and served a notice of intention on November 9, 1950, ninety-one days after the accident, and that the notice of claim was filed and served on January. 24, 1952.

The time within which to file the notice of intention was misapprehended, counsel having made his computation on a monthly basis. In the period following the accrual date of August 10, 1950, there were two intervening thirty-one-day months which entered into the calculation, requiring the filing of the notice to be made not later than November 8, 1950. The State was notified of the accident on September 14, 1950, or thirty-four days after the accident.

The Attorney-General urges that because the application for leave to file was made returnable on a day subsequent to the two-year period, though served and dated prior to two years from the accrual of the claim, the court lacks jurisdiction to grant claimant’s application. This contention cannot be sustained since the date of the application is the controlling factor and the motion must be deemed to have been made prior to the expiration of two years from the date of accrual of the claim. In *Thompson*v. *State of New York*(258 App. Div. 758) it was said: ‘ *‘*The State contends that the Court of Claims was without power to grant the order appealed from on the grounds that the order was not made until more than two years after the *525accrual of the claim. (Former Court of Claims Act, § 15, subd. 5.) Application for the order, however, was made prior to the expiration of the two-year period, and the order should, therefore, be held to refer back to the date of the application. ’ ’

Moreover, it appears that the paper bearing the legend *il*Notice of Intention ” contained all the necessary allegations of a notice of claim except for its labelling, and is therefore entitled to be regarded as a notice of claim. *(Chalmers & Son v. State of New York,*271 App. Div. 699, affd. 297 N. Y. 690.)

The State having had notice of facts pertaining to this claim within the ninety-day period and not having been prejudiced by the delay of one day which, in these circumstances, is excusable, the motion for leave to file the claim is granted. The formal claim which was filed and served on January 24, 1952, may retain the same claim number heretofore assigned to it by the clerk, making it unnecessary to file and serve any new claim.
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Sutura, Inc. ;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 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.
    
    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; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants fourth
quarter of 2005 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and




---



##### 



5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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 information; andb)
    
    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.
 Date: April ____, 2006
    By:
    /s/ Anthony NoblesAnthony NoblesChief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Consolidated Balance Sheets and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-26-1999
<CASH>                                          19,965
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,031
<ALLOWANCES>                                       124
<INVENTORY>                                     17,189
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,820
<PP&E>                                         571,302
<DEPRECIATION>                                 269,639
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 381,131
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           91,605
<BONDS>                                        304,194
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                    (88,248)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   381,131
<SALES>                                        524,671
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               528,470
<CGS>                                          150,892
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  443,438
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,879
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,419
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (188)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,231
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        (319)
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,912
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.25


</TABLE>
#### Mack Delaney MASON, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Florida Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 72-1037.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 12, 1973.

Habeas corpus denied.
Todd C. Emerson, #8175 

444 South River Road 

St. George, Utah, 84 790 

Telephone: (435) 634-3530 

Facsimile: (435) 634-3505 

Attorney for Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

RECEIVED 

JAN 0"1 Z'J14 

HEARING DOCKET 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

AMENDED NOTICE OF DEPOSITION 

OF AARON PERKINS 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0292 

FAA Case No. 2012NM060025 

Judge: Richard C. Goodwin 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46104(c), 49 C.F.R. § 821.19(a) and the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Respondent SkyWest Airlines will take the deposition of Aaron 

Perkins on January 15, 2014 beginning at 10:00 a.m., and continuing thereafter until completed at the 

offices of Seattle Deposition Reporters, 600 University Street (at Sixth Avenue), Suite 320, Seattle, 

Washington 98101, before a certified court reporter having the power to administer oaths. 

DATED this 2"dday ofJanuary, 2014. /1\ 

Attorney for Sky West Airlines, Inc. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 2"d day of January, 2014, I caused to be served the 

foregoing AMENDED NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF AARON PERKINS via facsimile and United 

States mail, first class postage pre-paid, on the following: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Rrn El2-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

{US. Mail} 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

{US. Mail} 

Robert Spitzer 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057 

{Facsimile and US. Mail} 

2
#### Franklin Hodgers WARNER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 77-1567, 77-2614.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 20, 1978.

Franklin Hodgers Warner, pro se.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Steven L. Bolotin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON and KEHOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See, e. g., *State v. Weeks,*166 So.2d 892 (Fla.1964); *Brumley v. State,*224 So.2d 447 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969); and *Simpson v. State,*164 So.2d 224 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Joseph C. SEPULVADO.

No. 61954.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 28, 1978.

In re: Joseph C. Sepulvado, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of DeSoto.

Writ denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-KSB
FOR THE YEAR  ENDING  DECEMBER  31,  1996 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-KSB.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000935802
<NAME>                        ANICOM, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                       195
<SECURITIES>                               4,345
<RECEIVABLES>                             28,147
<ALLOWANCES>                                 980
<INVENTORY>                               23,453
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          57,539
<PP&E>                                     3,516
<DEPRECIATION>                               696
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            87,954
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     24,143
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       8
<OTHER-SE>                                59,851
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              87,954
<SALES>                                  115,993
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         115,993
<CGS>                                     87,442
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             87,442
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          25,180
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           256
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            4,245
<INCOME-TAX>                               2,623
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        2,623
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                               2,623
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        



</TABLE>
September 20, 2016

Exemption No. 12984A

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–2816

Mr. Robert Adams

Carolina Aerial Imaging

124 Moontide Court

Lexington, SC 29072

Dear Mr. Adams:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition for an amendment. It explains 

the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists any changes to the original conditions 

and limitations.

By letter dated March 31, 2016, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Carolina Aerial Imaging (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an amendment to 

your current exemption. That exemption from §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 

61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 

allows the petitioner to conduct UAS operations. You requested an amendment to change the 

company name from Robert E. Adams to Carolina Aerial Imaging.

1

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment to the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner. 

 

1 The petitioner also requested to add aircraft. At this time, the FAA is unable to act on this request. When the 

FAA is ready to act, we will proceed accordingly and no further action will be required by the petitioner.
2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 12984

remains valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained 

in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the operator is 

granted an amendment to change the operator name.

The operator shall add this amendment to its original exemption.

 

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of amendment, Carolina Aerial Imaging is hereafter referred to as the operator.

All conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No. 12984 remain in effect. 

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be 

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption. 

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                             Certificate 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 Annual Report of Multi-Media Tutorial Services,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended February 28, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Barry Reichman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         a.       The report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: and

         b.       The information contained in the report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by
                  the Report.


Date: June 11, 2007                       /s/ Barry Reichman
                                          ------------------
                                          Barry Reichman
                                          Chief Executive Officer and Director,
                                          Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32(a)


              SECTION 1350 Certification (Chief Executive Officer)


In connection with the Annual Report of Coastal Financial Corporation, Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the period ended  September  30, 2005 as filed with
the  Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I Michael C. Gerald,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted  pursuant to ss.906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the
best of my knowledge:

1.    The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.    The information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as of and for the period covered by the Report.

This Certification is provided as of December 14, 2005.



                                                 /s/ Michael C. Gerald
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Michael C. Gerald
                                                 President/Chief
                                                 Executive Officer
# **EXHIBIT 32.2**

# ** **

# **Certification Pursuantto18 U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

I, Jill R. Marlatt, Controller (Principal FinancialOfficer), certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterlyperiod ended September 30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained herein fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Gateway Energy Corporation andits subsidiaries for the periods presented.

 

 

Date: November 15, 2010                                                 /s/ Jill R.Marlatt               

                                                                                         Jill R. Marlatt

                                                                                         Controller

                                                                                         (Principal Financial Officer)

 

###### ** **

 

 

 

----
Exhibit 12

                            FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION
                       Statement of Computation of Ratios
                              (Dollars In millions)

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges:

                                Twelve Months Ended      Year Ended
                                    September 30,        December 31,
                                  1997      1996       1996       1995
                                --------  --------   --------   --------

NET INCOME                        138.4     238.6      238.4     227.0

Add:
  Operating Income Taxes           70.5     137.1      135.8     129.5
  Other Income Taxes               (0.2)     (0.2)      (0.1)      0.1
                               --------- ---------  ---------  ---------
Income Before Taxes               208.7     375.5      374.1     356.6

Total Interest Charges            107.4      99.6       98.4     104.5
                               --------- ---------  ---------  ---------
Total Earnings (A)                316.1     475.1      472.5     461.1

Fixed Charges (B)                 107.4      99.6       98.4     104.5
                               --------- ---------  ---------  ---------
 Ratio of Earnings to
  Fixed Charges (A/B)              2.94      4.77       4.80      4.41
                               ========= =========  =========  =========
# Official Journal C 307/23 A

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 307 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5923 August 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 307

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5923 August 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 307/01 | Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species — fifth supplement to the 34th complete edition | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 307/01

Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species — fifth supplement to the 34th complete edition

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN