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

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

951 CAF 13-00206 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF LISA A. GALLAGHER, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MICHAEL T. GALLAGHER, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

WELCH & ZINK, CORNING (JEFF N. EVANS OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

BETZJITOMIR & BAXTER, LLP, BATH (SUSAN BETZJITOMIR OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

CAROLYN KELLOGG JONAS, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, WELLSVILLE.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Joseph W. Latham, J.), entered April 26, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the amended petition.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the amended petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Steuben County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Petitioner mother commenced this proceeding seeking an upward modification of respondent father’s child support obligation as set forth in the parties’ separation agreement. We agree with the mother that Family Court erred in concluding, following a hearing, that she failed to establish a sufficient change in circumstances to warrant modification of the father’s child support obligation.
The parties’ separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into the judgment of divorce, provided, inter alia, that the parties were opting out of the requirements of the Child Support Standards Act based on several factors, including that the children would spend a significant portion of time with the father pursuant to the visitation schedule set forth in the separation agreement. In her petition, the mother alleged that there had been a breakdown in the father’s relationship with the children such that there was only sporadic visitation with them, leading to a concomitant increase in her child-rearing expenses. The evidence presented at the hearing establishes that such a breakdown occurred.
We agree with the mother that “the complete breakdown in the-2- 951 CAF 13-00206
visitation arrangement, which effectively extinguished [the father’s] support obligation, constituted an unanticipated change in circumstances that created the need for modification of the child support obligations” ( Matter of Gravlin v Ruppert , 98 NY2d 1, 6; see Matter of McCormick v McCormick , 97 AD3d 682, 683; Matter of Joslin v Sullivan , 12 AD3d 1070, 1070). We therefore reverse the order insofar as appealed from, reinstate the amended petition, and remit the matter to Family Court for a determination of the appropriate amount of support to be paid by the father, after a further hearing if necessary.

Entered: September 27, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Attachment 003 – Process – TS11CM04

Page 1 of 1

SANITIZED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         513,042
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,825,328
<ALLOWANCES>                                   192,216
<INVENTORY>                                    815,715
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,325,475
<PP&E>                                         238,934
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,851,319
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,707,085
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,176,826
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,148,550
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,851,319
<SALES>                                      7,344,727
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,344,727
<CGS>                                        2,752,600
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,752,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,164,383
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              37,617
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,390,127
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,069
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,387,058
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,387,058
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .13
        

</TABLE>
#### Alvester BRYANT v. STATE.

No. 36066.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1967.

Certiorari dismissed without opinion.
EXHIBIT 32.1

906 CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(1)    The
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2003, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: | January 14, 2004 |  | /s/   David H. Roche                 
|----- | ---------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|      |                  |  |                                      
|      |                  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

| |  |  | /s/   Steven M. Caspers                             
| |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
| |  |  |                                                     
| |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



---
II 

Calendar No. 242 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1661 

To require the Secretary of State to offer rewards of up to $5,000,000 

for information regarding the attacks on the United States diplomatic 

mission at Benghazi, Libya that began on September 11, 2012. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 7, 2013 

Mr. CRUZ (for himself, Mr. GRAHAM, and Mr. INHOFE) introduced the 

following bill; which was read the first time 

NOVEMBER 12, 2013 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of State to offer rewards of up 

to $5,000,000 for information regarding the attacks on 

the United States diplomatic mission at Benghazi, Libya 

that began on September 11, 2012. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REWARDS AUTHORIZED. 

4 In accordance with the Rewards for Justice program 

5 authorized under section 36(b) of the State Department 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1661 PCS

1 Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2708(b)), the 

2 Secretary of State shall offer a reward of not more than 

3 $5,000,000 to individuals who furnish information— 

4 (1) regarding the attacks on the United States 

5 diplomatic mission at Benghazi, Libya that began on 

6 September 11, 2012; or 

7 (2) leading to the capture of an individual who 

8 committed, conspired to commit, attempted to com9 mit, or aided in the commission of the attacks de10 scribed in paragraph (1). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 242 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1661 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of State to offer rewards 

tember 11, 2012. sion at Benghazi, Libya that began on Septhe attacks on the United States diplomatic misof up to $5,000,000 for information regarding 

NOVEMBER 12, 2013 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Table 2.  Rental and Homeowner Vacancy Rates, by Area:  Third Quarter 2004 and 2005



                                    Rental vacancy rates


                              Third        Third           90-Percent
         Area                quarter      quarter     Confidence Interval (&plusmn;)<sup>a</sup>
                              2004         2005     of 2005 rate  of difference


United States..........        10.1          9.9          0.4          0.5

  Inside Core-Based
     Statistical Areas.         NA           9.7          0.5           NA
    In central cities..         NA           9.9          0.6           NA
    Not in central cities
    (suburbs)..........         NA           9.5          0.7           NA
  Outside Core-Based
    Statistical Areas..         NA          10.8          1.5           NA

 Northeast.............         7.3          6.0          0.6          0.8
 Midwest...............        12.3         13.4          0.9          1.1
 South.................        12.3         11.9          0.9          1.0
 West..................         7.7          7.3          0.8          0.9



                                    Homeowner vacancy rates


                            Third         Third              90-Percent
         Area              quarter       quarter        Confidence Interval (&plusmn;)<sup>a</sup>
                            2004          2005     of 2005 rate  of difference

United States..........         1.7         1.9          0.1          0.1

  Inside Core-Based
     Statistical Areas.         NA          2.0          0.2           NA
    In central cities..         NA          2.6          0.3           NA
    Not in central cities
    (suburbs)..........         NA          1.6          0.1           NA
  Outside Core-Based
    Statistical Areas..         NA          1.8          0.3           NA

 Northeast.............         1.2         1.4          0.2          0.3
 Midwest...............         2.1         2.3          0.3          0.3
 South.................         1.9         2.2          0.2          0.3
 West..................         1.4         1.5          0.2          0.3
    aA 90-percent confidence interval is a measure of an estimate's reliability.  The larger the confidence interval is, in
     relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.
NA Not available.  Core-Based Statistical Area data for 2005 and later are not comparable to earlier data.  Beginning
in first quarter 2005, the Current Population Survey/Housing Vacancy Survey is using the new metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical definitions which were announced by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in June 2003, and were based on the application of the 2000 standards to Census 2000 data.  OMB announced updates as of December 2003, based on application of the 2000 standards to more recent Census Bureau estimates.  The December 2003 definitions are available at:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/metrodef.html.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1689 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1689

 To treat payments by charitable organizations with respect to certain 
                    firefighters as exempt payments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 13, 2013

  Mr. Schumer introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To treat payments by charitable organizations with respect to certain 
                    firefighters as exempt payments.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fallen Firefighters Assistance Tax 
Clarification Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PAYMENTS BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN 
              FIREFIGHTERS TREATED AS EXEMPT PAYMENTS.

    (a) In General.--For purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
payments made to--
            (1) any firefighter who was injured as a result of the 
        ambush of firefighters responding to an emergency on December 
        24, 2012, in Webster, New York,
            (2) the spouse of any firefighter who died as a result of 
        such ambush, or
            (3) any dependent (as defined in section 152 of such Code) 
        of any firefighter who died as a result of such ambush,
by an organization described in paragraph (1) or (2) of section 509(a) 
of such Code shall be treated as related to the purpose or function 
constituting the basis for such organization's exemption under section 
501 of such Code if such payments are made in good faith using a 
reasonable and objective formula which is consistently applied.
    (b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall apply only to payments made 
on or after December 24, 2012, and before the later of--
            (1) January 1, 2014, or
            (2) the date which is 30 days after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 10:28 AM

To: 'info@pvam.net'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA); Ferritto, Michelle (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information - Perfect View Aerial Media, LLC

January 7, 2015 

Mr. Ben Richardson 

Perfect View Aerial Media, LLC 

7379 Lions Gate Road, Suite 108 

Coconut Creek, FL 33073 

Dear Mr. Richardson: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0845). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration to process your 

petition. Please submit the additional information to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any 

proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to nia.daniels@faa.gov. 

 List the aircraft’s cruise speed. 

 Provide description of proximity to airports. 

Please provide the additional information by January 21, 2014. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-7626. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels 

Program Analyst 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
<PAGE>

Eye Care Centers of America, Inc.                                   Exhibit 21.1
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
For the Year Ended 12/30/00

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                 Jurisdiction of     Name under which the
Subsidiary                                        Incorporation      subsidiary does business
--------------------------------------------      -------------      -----------------------------------
<S>                                              <C>                 <C>

Enclave Advancement Group, Inc.(A)                    Texas          Enclave Advancement Group, Inc.

ECCA Managed Vision Care, Inc.(A)                     Texas          ECCA Managed Vision Care, Inc.

Visionworks Holdings, Inc.(A)                        Florida         Visionworks Holdings, Inc.

Visionworks, Inc.(B)                                 Florida         Visionworks

Visionworks Properties, Inc.(B)                      Florida         Visionworks Properties, Inc.

Eye Care Holdings, Inc.(A)                          Delaware         Eye Care Holdings, Inc.

Hour Eye's Inc.(C)                                  Maryland         Hour Eyes

Metropolitan Vision Services, Inc.(C)               Virginia         Metropolitan Vision Services

Visionary Retail Management, Inc.(C)                Delaware         Visionary Retail Management, Inc.

Visionary Properties, Inc.(C)                       Delaware         Visionary Properties, Inc.

Visionary MSO, Inc.(C)                              Delaware         Visionary MSO, Inc.

Stein Optical, Inc.(C)                              Delaware         Stein Optical, Inc.

Vision World, Inc.(C)                               Delaware         Vision World, Inc.

Eye DRx Retail Management, Inc.(C)                  Delaware         Eye DRx Retail Management, Inc.

</TABLE>


(A) 100% owned by Eye Care Centers of America, Inc.
(B) 100% owned by Visionworks Holdings, Inc.
(C) 100% owned by Eye Care Holdings, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1457 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1457

 To exempt the aging process of distilled spirits from the production 
        period for purposes of capitalization of interest costs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 1, 2013

Mr. McConnell (for himself and Mr. Paul) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To exempt the aging process of distilled spirits from the production 
        period for purposes of capitalization of interest costs.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Aged Distilled Spirits 
Competitiveness Act''.

SEC. 2. PRODUCTION PERIOD OF DISTILLED SPIRITS.

    (a) In General.--Section 263A(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5), and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(4) Exemption for aging process of distilled spirits.--
        For purposes of this subsection, the production period shall 
        not include the aging period for distilled spirits (as 
        described in section 5002(a)(8)).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to the production of distilled spirits that begins on or after 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 155 

To designate a mountain in the State of Alaska as Denali. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 28, 2013 

Ms. MURKOWSKI introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To designate a mountain in the State of Alaska as Denali. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF DENALI IN THE STATE OF 

4 ALASKA. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The mountain located at 63° 04′ 

6 12′′ N, by 151° 00′ 18′′ W, in the State of Alaska shall 

7 be known and designated as ‘‘Denali’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the mountain described in subsection (a) shall 

11 be deemed to be a reference to ‘‘Denali’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 142 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 142

  To prohibit the expenditure of Federal funds for abortions, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 24 (legislative day, January 3), 2013

   Mr. Casey introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the expenditure of Federal funds for abortions, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Hyde Amendment Codification Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITING FEDERALLY FUNDED ABORTIONS.

    Title 1 of the United States Code is amended by adding at the end 
the following new chapter:

          ``CHAPTER 4--PROHIBITING FEDERALLY FUNDED ABORTIONS

``SEC. 301. PROHIBITION ON FUNDING FOR ABORTIONS.

    ``(a) In General.--No funds authorized or appropriated by Federal 
law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are 
authorized or appropriated by Federal law, shall be expended for any 
abortion.
    ``(b) Health Benefits Coverage.--No funds authorized or 
appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to 
which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, shall be 
expended for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of 
abortion.

``SEC. 302. TREATMENT OF ABORTIONS RELATED TO RAPE, INCEST, OR 
              PRESERVING THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER.

    ``The limitations established in sections 301 shall not apply to an 
abortion--
            ``(1) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or 
        incest; or
            ``(2) in the case where a woman suffers from a physical 
        disorder, physical injury, or physical illness, including a 
        life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from 
        the pregnancy itself, that would, as certified by a physician, 
        place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is 
        performed.''.
                                 <all>
```
Table 4.  Estimates of the Total Housing Inventory for the
                United States:  Third Quarter 1998 and 1997

(Estimates are in thousands and may not add to total, due to rounding)


                                    Third     Third    Standard
                                   quarter   quarter   error on  Standard     1998
Type                                 1998      1997      1998    error on   Percent
                                   estimate  estimate  estimate difference  of total

All housing units.................  117,368   115,804       235        334       100

  Occupied........................  103,492   102,433       245        347        88
    Owner occupied................   69,143    67,556       242        342        59
    Renter occupied...............   34,349    34,877       196        278        29

  Vacant..........................   13,876    13,371       133        187        12
    Year-round vacant.............   10,508    10,013       117        164         9
      For rent....................    3,120     3,018        65         92         3
      For sale only...............    1,208     1,062        41         56         1
      Rented or sold,
      awaiting occupancy..........      964       941        36         51         1
      Held off market.............    5,216     4,992        84        117         4
        For occasional use........    1,758     1,795        49         70         1
        Temporarily occupied
        by persons with
        usual residence elsewhere.      880       880        35         49         1
        For other reasons.........    2,578     2,317        59         82         2

    Seasonal vacant...............    3,368     3,358        68         96         3