alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">TAM Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Arsene Macajoux, Appellant,<br><br>against<br><br>21st Century Insurance Company, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (William A. Viscovich, J.), entered November 21, 2013. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action was premature because plaintiff had failed to provide requested verification. By order entered November 21, 2013, the Civil Court granted defendant's motion.</p><p>For the reasons stated in <i>Mollo Chiropractic, PLLC, as Assignee of Miguel Concepcion v Farmington Cas. Co.</i> (___ Misc 3d ___, 2016 NY Slip Op ___ [appeal No. 2013-2574 K C], decided herewith), the order is reversed and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.</p><p>Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: October 11, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

  As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of
our reports included in this Form 10-K into the Company's previously filed
registration statements File No. 333-06821 on Form S-8, File No. 333-28323 on
Form S-3, File No. 333-32447 on Form S-3, File No. 333-32448 on Form S-8, and
File No. 333-45973 on Form S-3.

                                          /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 27, 1998
Exhibit 31.2
 
 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer
 of Periodic Report Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a)
 
 I, Kristin Van Dask, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:
 
 1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TP Flexible Income Fund, Inc. (the “Company”);
 
 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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4) The Company’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 Company 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 Company, 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 Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 c) disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5) The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of the Company’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 Company’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 Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
 
 
 /s/ Kristin Van Dask
 Kristin Van Dask
 Chief Financial Officer
 (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
 Date: February 12, 2020
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Refund Processing Communications Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, March 01, 2012.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ellen Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-231-2360.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section                           ( print page 8328)                        10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Refund Processing Communications Project Committee will be held Thursday, March 01, 2012 at 2 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Ms. Ellen Smiley. For more information please contact Ms. Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-231-2360, or write TAP Office Stop 1006MIL, 211 West Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: February 8, 2012.

Shawn Collins,

Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2012-3366 Filed 2-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.34 MB)

Tags:dla, Army, Defense Logistics Agency, scholarship

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### Margaret P. OLIVER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOMESTAKE ENTERPRISES, INC., a Colorado corporation, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 89CA0127.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. III.

April 12, 1990.

Rehearing Denied May 10, 1990.

Certiorari Granted Dec. 10, 1990.

Richard H. Cairns, P.C., Richard H. Cairns, Denver, for plaintiff-appellant.

Pryor, Carney & Johnson, John L. Wheeler, Englewood, for defendant-appellee.

Opinion by

Judge TURSI.

In this negligence action, plaintiff, Margaret P. Oliver, appeals from a summary judgment dismissing her complaint against defendant, Homestake Enterprises, Inc. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Plaintiff slipped and fell on an icy sidewalk near Penrose Hospital in Colorado Springs on November 15, 1984. On February 25, 1988, she filed a complaint seeking damages for her injuries and alleging that the ice had formed as a result of defendant’s negligent operation of a sprinkler system which it had partially installed at the hospital.

Defendant answered and filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that the action was barred by the statute of limitations. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that plaintiff’s failure to file her action within two years of her injury operated as a bar to her claims under Colo.Sess. Laws 1979, ch. 144, § 13-80-127 at 631 (now codified at § 13-80-104, C.R.S. (1987 Repl.Vol. 6A)).

Plaintiff contends that the two-year statute of limitations for construction defects does not apply to an action against a contractor for negligent operation of a sprinkler system. We agree.

This court recently held that § 13-80-127 applied only to negligence in planning, design, construction, supervision, or inspection that results in a *defect*in an improvement to real property that, in turn, causes injury to a claimant. Furthermore, the statute limits actions against a contractor arising from defects in an improvement, but it does not supplant the applicability of the general limitation statute for all injuries caused by a contractor’s negligent conduct. *Irwin v. Elam Construction, Inc.,*793 P.2d 609 (Colo.App.1990).

Here, plaintiff’s complaint alleged that it was the contractor’s negligent operation of the sprinkler system, not a construction defect, that caused her injuries. Therefore, we conclude that plaintiff’s complaint *1332was not barred by the two-year statute of limitations applicable to contractors for construction defects. *See Irwin v. Elam Construction, Inc., supra.*

In view of our resolution of this issue, we find it unnecessary to address plaintiffs other contention.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

METZGER and CRISWELL, JJ., concur.
August 31, 2016

U.S. Department of T

ransportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

RE: Amendment to Exemption 11426 issued pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in Regulatory Docket

NO. FAA-2015-0173

Dear Sir or Madam:

Alaska Aerial Media LLC. was issued an Exemption numbered 11426 (hereinafter the Exemption) for the purpose of aerial cinematography and videograph y

, as well as implementation of emergency use UAS systems with public entities. Alaska Aerial Media requests an amendment to the exemption to allow for BLOS (Beyond Line of Sight) for use in aerial data collection applications with our
aircraft previously approved via our amendments

.

Alaska Aerial Media LLC wishes to operate UAS systems BLOS in Class G airspace with the use of LATAS software to mitigate safety concerns by watching manned traffic and UAS traffic while avoiding obstacles or collisions. Alaska Aerial Media currently conducts survey in remote locations in Alaska and is confident that
UAS operations can reduce the risk associated with manned aviation. All operations of the additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms of the Exemption.

Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions concerning this request for amendment to the Exemption.

Sincerely,

Ryan P . Marlow

Alaska Aeria l Media 7960 Upper O Malley Road Anchorage Alaska 99507

T el e : (9 07 )-7 17 -9 79 4
Proposed Rule: Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 Revisions and Confidentiality Determinat

and Natural Gas Systems Meeting Documentation 

Date Staff Contact Information 

(Name, email, phone #) 

Name of Organization (Attach list of all attendees names and emails if possible) 

Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability, reporting requirements, etc.) 

Written CommenProvidedDid they submit to Docket? 

6/24/15 Alexis McKittrick, 

mckittrick.alexis@epa.gov, 202-343-9153 Other EPA attendees: Anhar Karimjee Mark de Figueiredo Lisa Grogan-McCulloch 

Karin Ritter, API, Ritterk@api.org Mark Bareta, Williams Reid Smith, BP Grover Campbell, Devon Brad Morello, Shell Kimberly Coy, Shell Shankar Ananthakrishna, Chevron Kindal Keen, AECOM 

- Completions and 

workovers of oil wells with hydraulic fracturing 

- Gathering and boosting 

- Best available 

monitoring methods 

None providedsubmittecommenthe dockthe rule
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 8328]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3367]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Project 
Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free 
Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is 
soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer 
service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, March 06, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marianne Dominguez at 1-888-912-1227 
or 954-423-7978.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Project 
Committee will be held Tuesday, March 06, 2012, at 11 a.m. Eastern Time 
via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments 
or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited 
conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made 
with Marianne Dominguez. For more information please contact Ms. 
Dominguez at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7978, or write TAP Office, 1000 
South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324, or contact us 
at the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

     Dated: February 8, 2012.
Shawn Collins,
Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2012-3367 Filed 2-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit




EXHIBIT 10(b)


SUMMARY OF BASE SALARY AND ANNUAL INCENTIVE
COMPENSATION PAYABLE TO NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS


2016 Base Salary.  The Compensation and Management Development Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) of the Board of Directors of The Sherwin-Williams Company (“Sherwin-Williams”) set the 2016 base salaries of the executive officers who are expected to be named in the Summary Compensation Table of Sherwin-Williams’ 2016 Proxy Statement (the “Named Executive Officers”).  The base salaries of the Named Executive Officers for 2016 are as follows:  Christopher M. Connor, Executive Chairman ($1,221,987); John G. Morikis, President and Chief Executive Officer ($1,100,000); Sean P. Hennessy, Senior Vice President - Finance and Chief Financial Officer ($684,658); and Robert J. Davisson, President, The Americas Group ($614,692).  Steven J. Oberfeld, formerly Senior Vice President - Corporate Planning and Development, retired at the close of business on December 31, 2015.


Annual Incentive Compensation to Be Earned in 2016.  The Compensation Committee also approved the following minimum, target and maximum cash bonus award levels, as a percent of salary, for the Named Executive Officers for 2016 under The Sherwin-Williams Company 2007 Executive Performance Bonus Plan.


    	
									
	 
	 
	Incentive Award as a Percentage of Base Salary

	Named Executive Officer
	 
	Minimum
	 
	Target
	 
	Maximum

	Christopher M. Connor
	 
	0
	 
	135
	

	 
	270
	


	John G. Morikis
	 
	0
	 
	135
	

	 
	270
	


	Sean P. Hennessy
	 
	0
	 
	80
	

	 
	160
	


	Robert J. Davisson
	 
	0
	 
	80
	

	 
	160
	


	Steven J. Oberfeld
	 
	N/A
	 
	N/A
	

	 
	N/A
Exhibit






Exhibit 10(c)
Magellan GP, LLC
Non-Management Director
Compensation Program


Effective January 1, 2016








	
			
	 
	Compensation
	Timing of Payment(1)

	Annual Board Retainer:(2)
    Cash




    Common Units
	

$65,000




$110,000(3)
	

Paid quarterly as of January 1st, April 1st, July 1st and October 1st 


As of January 1st 

	Annual Chairman Retainer:(2) 
    Audit Committee
    Compensation Committee
    Conflicts Committee
Nominating and Governance             Committee
Presiding Director
	

$15,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$15,000
	Paid quarterly as of January 1st, April 1st, July 1st and October 1st 

	Meeting Fees: 
    Board Meeting Fees
    Committee Meeting Fees
	

$1,500 per meeting
$1,500 per meeting
	

Paid quarterly as of January 1st, April 1st, July 1st and October 1st 






		
	(1)
	For newly elected directors or a newly appointed committee chairman, the annual board retainer and annual chairman retainer, if applicable, are payable pro-rata for the year of election.  




		
	(2)
	Directors who resign from the board or relinquish their role of committee chairman after a payment date has occurred, but prior to the payment having been received, will receive a pro-rata annual board retainer and annual chairman retainer for the period of time between the payment date and the resignation/relinquishment. 




		
	(3)
	The number of common units to be issued for the annual board retainer will be determined based on the closing price on the first business day immediately following the January 1st payment date.
#### Board of Managers of Yardarm Beach Condominium, on Behalf of the Condominium and the Unit Owners Thereof, et al., Plaintiffs, v Vector Yardarm Corporation, Appellant, and Vector Real Estate Corporation, Appellant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. David K. Specter et al., ThirdParty Defendants-Respondents. (And a Fourth Party Action.)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), entered October 24, 1990, granting third-party defendant E.W. Howell Co.’s motion and third-party defendant Specter’s cross-motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Any breach of contract claim by third-party plaintiff Vector against third-party defendant Specter is barred by the six year statute of limitations (CPLR 213 [2]). A cause of action against an architect based on breach of his contract to design and oversee construction accrues on the date the final certificate of occupancy is issued. *(State of New York v Lundin,*60 NY2d 987; *Sears, Roebuck & Co. v Enco Assocs.,*43 NY2d 389.) Here, the certificate of occupancy was issued in November 1976. Thus, Vector’s claims brought against Specter in 1983 are time barred. Vector’s request for application of the "continuous treatment doctrine” was properly rejected. There was no evidence of an ongoing confidential professional relationship between Vector and Specter arising out of Phase I construction after 1976. *(Borgia v City of New York,*12 NY2d 151.)

*304Furthermore, by letter dated July 13, 1977, Vector expressly and unequivocally released Howell, the contractor, from any and all future contractual obligations. This release, apparently part of the settlement of final payment between Howell and Vector, is both valid and binding. *(See, Matter of Schaefer,*18 NY2d 314.)

Lastly, neither Specter nor E.W. Howell Co. may be held liable in implied indemnification or implied contribution. Vector alone dictated modifications of Specter’s plans, against Specter’s advice, and Howell complied with those modifications. Under these circumstances, Vector cannot assert that it is only vicariously liable for wrongs actually committed by the third-party defendants or that third-party defendants should ratably share Vector’s liability for the negligent and fraudulent misrepresentations alleged by plaintiffs in the main action. *(Mas v Two Bridges Assocs.,*75 NY2d 680, 689-690; *McDermott v City of New York,*50 NY2d 211.) Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Asch and Kassal, JJ.
----

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 31 January 2005

in Case T-447/04 R Capgemini Nederland BV v Commission of the European Communities

(Public contracts for services - Community tendering procedure - Interim proceedings - Prima facie case - Urgency)

(2005/C 93/57)

Language of the case: English

In Case T-447/04 R: Capgemini Nederland BV, established in Utrecht (Netherlands), represented by M. Meulenbelt and H. Speyart, lawyers, against Commission of the European Communities (Agent: L. Parpala, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for suspension of operation, first, of the Commission's decision to reject the bid submitted by the applicant in response to a call for tenders (JAI-C3-2003-01) for the development and installation of a second-generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) and for the possible development and installation of a Visa Information System (VIS) in the field of justice and home affairs and of its decision to award the contract to another bidder and, secondly, of the Commission's decision to conclude a contract relating to the SIS II and VIS systems with another bidder — the President of the Court of First Instance has made an order on 31 January 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

----