alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Rose Mirabile et al., Respondents, v Albert Profy et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), entered October 25, 1989, which, *inter alia,*denied their separate motions for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting *730the provision thereof which denied those branches of the motion which were for summary judgment with respect to the plaintiffs’ second cause of action and substituting therefor a provision granting those branches of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the appellants.

In February 1975 the plaintiff Rose Mirabile underwent a hernia operation performed by the defendant Dr. Albert Profy. Five years later, in April 1980 an X-ray revealed the presence of a surgical needle in Mrs. Mirabile’s abdominal wall. The plaintiffs commenced this present action against the defendants in August 1982. Since the operation took place prior to July 1, 1975, the effective date of CPLR 214-a, the prior three-year Statute of Limitations for medical malpractice, measured from the date of discovery, governed *(see, Flanagan v Mount Eden Gen. Hosp.,*24 NY2d 427). Thus, the plaintiffs’ action was timely commenced *(see,*CPLR 214-a; L 1975, ch 109, § 37; *McDermott v Torre,*56 NY2d 399; *Flanagan v Mount Eden Gen. Hosp., supra).*

However, since the plaintiffs’ second cause of action merely alleged that the defendants "fraudulently concealed” the presence of the surgical needle, it failed to state a cause of action, and thus, should have been dismissed *(see, Simcuski v Saeli,*44 NY2d 442). Sullivan, J. P., Fiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

August 9, 2012

 

Via EDGAR

 

Securities and Exchange Commission

Judiciary Plaza

450 Fifth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Re:          Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of VOC Energy Trust (the “Trust”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

 

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

 

(2)           The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.

 

The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.

 
|     | The   Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------|
|     | Trustee   for VOC Energy Trust                     |
|     |                                               |   |
|     | By:                                                | /s/   MIKE ULRICH |
|     |                                               | Mike   Ulrich |
| * * | * *                                           | *Vice President and Trust Officer* |

 

----
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

FRANCISCO DE ARAGON

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 2 2

- 1481

[ December 22, 2022 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.8 5 0 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seven teenth Judicial Circuit, Broward C ounty ; Michael Rothschild

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 15

- 6543 CF 10A

.

Matthew R. McLain of McLain Law, P.A., L ongwood

, for appellant

.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

K LINGENSMITH

, C.J., C ONNER and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         590,236
<SECURITIES>                                   299,649
<RECEIVABLES>                                  166,532
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,000
<INVENTORY>                                    287,321
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,540,319
<PP&E>                                         611,587
<DEPRECIATION>                                 478,540
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,161,036
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          443,844
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          3
<COMMON>                                           115
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,717,074
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,161,036
<SALES>                                        787,408
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               823,753
<CGS>                                          619,665
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  619,665
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,309,406
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,041,634)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,041,634)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,041,634)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.33)


</TABLE>
----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3744 — ALCOA/AFL)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2005/C 50/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)  Available on DG COMP website:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/legislation/consultation/simplified_tru.pdf.

----
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Arthur R. Ames, Appellant, v Timothy Murray, as Superintendent of Groveland Correctional Facility, Respondent.

[727 NYS2d 366]

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s motion to be relieved of assignment granted *{see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County — Howe, J. — Habeas Corpus.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Kehoe, Burns and Lawton, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1




CERTIFICATION




I, Thomas C. Byrne, certify that:




1.           I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Swisher Hygiene 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(s) 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;




c)           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




d)           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; and




5.           The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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; 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.






Date: February 19, 2013
/s/ Thomas C. ByrneThomas C. ByrnePresident and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Preventia, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

                                 /s/ Murray Friedman, DDS
                                 ----------------------
                                 Murray Friedman
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 Principal Financial Officer

May 13, 2011
#### Wallace COLBURN, Petitioner, v. SCREENCO, INC., and the Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 43232.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 20, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ, concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3774 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3774

                     To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 2, 1994

 Mr. Inglis of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                     To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act.

    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 ``Davis-Bacon Abolition Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL.

    The Act of March 3, 1931 (40 U.S.C. 276a--276a-5) (known as the 
Davis-Bacon Act) is repealed.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The repeal made by section 2 shall take effect 5 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act. Such repeal shall not affect the 
validity or continued operation of a contract entered into before the 
date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form
10-K) of Pemstar Inc. of our report dated May 7, 2003, except for Note 18, as to
which the date is July 10, 2003, included in the 2003 Annual Report to
Shareholders of PEMSTAR Inc.

     Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Pemstar Inc.
listed in Item 15(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.

     We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-44044) pertaining to the Pemstar Inc. 1994 Stock
Option Plan, Pemstar Inc. 1995 Stock Option Plan, Pemstar Inc. 1997 Stock Option
Plan, Pemstar Inc. 1999 Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan, Pemstar Inc.
2000 Stock Option Plan and 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Registration
Statement (Form S-3, No. 333-75284) pertaining to Common Stock, Preferred Stock,
Debt Securities, Depository Shares, Securities Warrants and Units, the
Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-97517) pertaining to the Pemstar Inc.
2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Pemstar Inc. 2002 Stock Option Plan and
the Registration Statement (Form S-3/A, No. 333-97511) pertaining to Common
Stock, of our report dated May 7, 2003, except for Note 18, as to which the date
is July 10, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Pemstar Inc. incorporated herein by reference and our report included in the
preceding paragraph with respect to the financial statement schedule included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Pemstar Inc. for the year ended March 31,
2003.

                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
July 10, 2003
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4122 Committee Discharged Senate (CDS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H.R. 4122

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             March 24 (legislative day, February 22), 1994

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

             March 25 (legislative day, February 22), 1994

                          Committee discharged

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To temporarily extend certain provisions of the Marine Mammal 
                            Protection Act.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 114(a)(1) 
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1383a(a)(1)), is 
amended by striking ``April 1, 1994,'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
``May 1, 1994,''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 24, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7404
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMES K. BURKS, JR., a/k/a Howard Theodore Wright, a/k/a Marcus Williams, a/k/a Nathan King, a/k/a Derrick Baxter, a/k/a Marcus Allen, a/k/a Martin Wilson, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-460-A, CA-97-613-AM) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 28, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lee Jenkins, Jr., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Gordon Dean Kromberg, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997) motion. We have reviewed the record and the d istrict court's opinion and find noreversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Burks , Nos. CR-93-460-A; CA-97-613-AM (E.D. Va. Aug. 28, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
A R AMBUlANCE 

October 20, 2014 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

To Whom it May Concern: 

American Medflight hereby requests a hearing in regards to Case Number 2014WP11 0010. 

k you, 

Copy to: Naomi Tsuda, Regional Counsel 

PO Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

PO Box 10166 

pll 775 856-5800 b: 775-855-5801 

Re11D, Nevada 895'10 

www· amencanm2driighr.com
**
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2020 (the“Report”) of Solar Senior Capital Ltd. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, BRUCE J. SPOHLER, the Co-Chief Executive Officer ofthe Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. 

 
  
/S/ BRUCE J. SPOHLER
**Name:** **Bruce J. Spohler****Date:** **August 4, 2020****
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2012 (the Report) of
PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Aviv Efrat, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,
that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|              
|--------------
|/s/ Aviv Efrat
|Aviv Efrat    
|August 9, 2012
EXHIBIT 23.2

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

         We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statement of The Singing Machine Company, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-59684)
of our audit report dated June 12, 2000, on the financial statements of The
Singing Machine Company, Inc. and subsidiary for the fiscal year ended March 31,
2000, included in this Annual Report on the Form 10-KSB for the year ended March
31, 2001.



 /s/  WEINBERG & COMPANY, P.A.
Boca Raton, Florida
June 28, 2001
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 505 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 22
113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 505

  To prohibit the use of drones to kill citizens of the United States 
                       within the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2013

Mr. Cruz (for himself, Mr. Paul, and Mr. Lee) introduced the following 
                  bill; which was read the first time

                             March 11, 2013

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the use of drones to kill citizens of the United States 
                       within the United States.

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

SECTION 1. DRONES.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section--
            (1) the term ``drone'' means an unmanned aircraft (as 
        defined in section 331 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 
        of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note));
            (2) the term ``serious bodily injury'' has the meaning 
        given that term in section 1365 of title 18, United States 
        Code; and
            (3) the term ``United States'' as used in a territorial 
        sense, has the meaning given that term in section 5 of title 
        18, United States Code.
    (b) Prohibition.--The Federal Government may not use a drone to 
kill a citizen of the United States who is located in the United 
States. The prohibition under this subsection shall not apply to an 
individual who poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily 
injury to another individual. Nothing in this section shall be 
construed to suggest that the Constitution would otherwise allow the 
killing of a citizen of the United States in the United States without 
due process of law.
                                                        Calendar No. 22

113th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 505

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To prohibit the use of drones to kill citizens of the United States 
                       within the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 11, 2013

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```