alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Hannah Goldstein et al., Respondents, v Arthur I. Winard, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Vidal Santaella, J.), entered June 27, *2021989, denying defendant Winard’s motion, pursuant to CPLR 3212, for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of dismissing the cause of action for punitive damages and *sua sponte*amending the *ad damnum*clause of the complaint to include a demand for punitive damages, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Special Term properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the causes of action alleging breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud, as barred by the six year Statute of Limitations, under CPLR 213 (1). Examination of the complaint discloses that it states a claim for actual fraud, such that the action should have been commenced within six years after commission of the fraud, or two years from the time plaintiff discovered, or could with reasonable diligence have discovered, the fraud, whichever is later. *(Quadrozzi Concrete Corp. v Mastroianni,*56 AD2d 353, *appeal dismissed*42 NY2d 824; *cf., Schmertz v Friedlander,*36 AD2d 606.) We find that there exists a triable issue of fact, precluding summary judgment, with respect to whether plaintiffs, with reasonable diligence, could have discovered the fraud in 1981, as alleged by defendant. Plaintiff Goldstein’s letter to Winard, complaining of defendant Marvin Rosenblatt’s waste and diversion of company assets, apparently sent subsequent to finalization of William Rosenblatt’s estate, is an insufficient basis upon which to impute knowledge to both plaintiffs, or to conclude that they could have discovered, with reasonable diligence, the alleged fraudulent undervaluation of William Rosenblatt’s estate or that they had been fraudulently induced to renounce their rights and release defendants from liability in connection with the administration of that estate.

We also reject the claim that plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging conversion is time barred, since under the circumstances presented, the time within which the action must be commenced is computed from the time plaintiffs, having the right to demand property allegedly converted, discovered facts upon which the right depends. *(Bernstein v La*Rue, 120 AD2d 476, *lv dismissed*70 NY2d 746.)

There is no merit to defendant’s claim that the causes of action alleging wrongful conduct with respect to defendant’s participation as preliminary co-executor of Cecil Rosenblatt’s estate should be dismissed. Those causes of action allege sufficient facts separate and independent from the claims of misconduct in connection with William Rosenblatt’s estate. Since there can be no separate cause of action for punitive *203damages, plaintiffs’ separate cause of action for punitive damages should be dismissed. The complaint’s *ad damnum*clause, is *sua sponte,*amended to assert that claim. *(Beck v General Tire & Rubber Co.,*98 AD2d 756, *lv dismissed*63 NY2d 769.) Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Ross, JJ.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1919 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain women’s footwear. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 26, 2009 

Mr. ROBERTS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain women’s 

footwear. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN WOMEN’S FOOTWEAR. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Other footwear with uppers 

of vegetable fibers, for 

women. (provided for in subheading 6405.20.30) ............. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1919 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of the Liquidation of Constellation Reinsurance Company of New York. Great American Insurance Company, Appellant-Respondent, v James P. Corcoran, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, Respondent-Appellant.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Schackman, J.), entered on December 4, 1989, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Walter Schackman, J., without costs. No opinion. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Kassal and Smith, JJ.
Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended October
3, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ MICHAEL J. THORNEMichael J. ThorneSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Date: November 12, 2008
**EXHIBIT 23.2****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-143083 on Form S-8of our reports dated March 14, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements andfinancial statement schedule of International Wire Group, Inc. and subsidiaries (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph regarding the adoptionFinancial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in IncomeTaxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109”, effective January 1, 2007) and theeffectiveness of International Wire Group, Inc. and subsidiaries’ internal control over financialreporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of International Wire Group, Inc. for theyear ended December 31, 2007./s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPRochester, New York
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2068 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2068

           To suspend temporarily the duty on fenpyroximate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To suspend temporarily the duty on fenpyroximate.

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

SECTION 1. FENPYROXIMATE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00       Tert-butyl (E)-a-   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/ ''.
                          (1,3-dimethyl-5-                                                   31/2011.......
                          phenoxypyrazol-4-
                          ylmethyleneaminoo
                          xy)-p-toluate
                          (Fenpyroximate)
                          (CAS No. 134098-
                          61-6) (provided
                          for in subheading
                          2933.99.22)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

?'1!7 ' 3 ()D~A,Jll)IQ:ENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

TRAVEL GROUP, INC., D/B/A REPUBLIC AIR TRAVEL 

AND SCOT SPENCER 

AIRLIFT GROUP, INC. 

AND RICHARD BERNARD 

Unauthorized Air Transportation, Unfair and Deceptive 

Practices and Unfair Methods of Competition, and 

Violations of Public Charter Rules 

EXPRESS ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

Enforcement Proceeding 

STATUS REPORT 

DOT -OST -1995-272 

formerly 

Docket 49233 

The Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings ("Enforcement Office"), pursuant to Your Honor's March 22, 2006, Order 

staying this proceeding, files this report detailing the current status of this proceeding and 

settlement negotiations. 

The Department has not ruled on the outstanding motions filed by Respondents 

and opposed by the Enforcement Office in Ascend Aviation Group, Docket OST-2004-

17486. 
2 

There have been no further settlement discussions. 

Date: August 31,2012. 

Respectfully submitted, 

,-5:>~ Samuel Podberesky 

Assistant General Counsel for ' 

Senior Trial Attorney 

United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Room 96-429 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: 202-366-9342 

FAX: 202-366-7152 
3 

Docket No. DOT-OST-1995-272 

I hereby certify that on this 31st day of August, 2012, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Status Report was served in the following manner to the following: 

Original 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

By First Class Mail 

The Honorable Ronnie A Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: (202) 366-2142 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

By First Class Mail 

Scot Spencer 

SBD Aircraft Services 

255 S Leland Norton Way 

Sam Bernardino, CA 92408
e_~

- yS71 

~ lnventorvExpertService 

A division of the American Chemical Sociefy Phone: 800-831-1884, 614-447-3870 

Fax:614-447-3747 

E-mail: answers@cas.org 

Web: www.cas.org/products/other-cas-products/cfient-services/ 

INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT 

IES Order Number: 373562-2 

Registry Nuinber: 1502809-56-4 

CA Index Name: 

Phosphoric acid, mixed Bu and decyl and octyl and 2-(2-phenoxyethoxy)ethyi 

and 2-phenoxyeY.hyl esters, potassium salts 

Please print the above CA lndex Name on the appropriate page of your PMN. 

El If this box is checked, CAS has made correction(s) marked in red to your IES order. 

Piease make the same corrections to your PMN before submitting it to the EPA. 

CAS - 2540 Olentangy River Road - P.O. Box 3343 - Columbus, OH 43210-0334 - USA
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Thompson, Mary (FAA)

Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 11:21 AM

To: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Subject: FW: Docket FAA-2000-8222 Clarification

Please post the communication below to the docket.

Mary Thompson

Flight Standards, Air Transportation Division

Policy Integration Branch, AFS‐270

From: Barbaria, Rebecca [mailto:Rebecca.Barbaria@mesa-air.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 5:38 PM 

To: Thompson, Mary (FAA) 

Cc: Campbell, Tyler 

Subject: RE: Docket FAA-2000-8222 Clarification 

Hello Ms. Thompson,

Mesa Airlines, Inc. does not wish to exercise the privileges of this exemption outside of the United States.

Please let us know if you need anything else regarding this petition that may cause any delay since our current

exemption expires on July 31st.

Regards,

Rebecca G. Barbaria

Mgr. of Standards & Training

Mesa Airlines, Inc.

From: Mary.Thompson@faa.gov [mailto:Mary.Thompson@faa.gov]  

Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 6:34 AM

To: Barbaria, Rebecca <Rebecca.Barbaria@mesa‐air.com>

Subject: Docket FAA‐2000‐8222 Clarification

  

Ms. Barbaria:

  

The purpose of this email is to request clarification regarding your petition for extension of Exemption No. 10831

(Docket FAA‐2000‐8222).  

  

In accordance with Title 14 CFR § 11.81(h), if Mesa wants to exercise the privileges of an exemption, if granted, outside

the United States, “the reason why you need to do so” must be included in the petition for exemption. Otherwise, in

accordance with § 11.83, the FAA will limit the exemption, if granted, to use within the United States.

  

The Mesa petition for exemption from Title 14 CFR § 121.434(c)(1)(ii), posted to the docket June 29, 2016, did not

specifically request use of the petition outside of the United States. However, the FAA is aware that Mesa conducts

international operations. Therefore, the FAA requests clarification on whether Mesa wants to exercise the privileges of

this exemption, if granted, outside the United States.
2

  

Please respond to this email with the clarification, which will be posted to the public docket. If Mesa wants to exercise

the privileges of this exemption, if granted, outside the United States, please also include the information required by §

11.81(h).

  

Thanks,

  

Mary Thompson

Flight Standards, Air Transportation Division

Policy Integration Branch, AFS‐270
##### 



EXHIBIT 32(b) CERTIFICATION 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 CheckFree Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
David E. Mangum, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (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. Date: September 3, 2004
    /s/ David E. Mangum
David E. Mangum
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
CheckFree Corporation
 This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the
date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language
contained in such filing.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 23

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 33-98440, 33-98444, 33-98442, 33-98446, 333-21799, 333-21795, 333-70599,
333-35812, and 333-35814) on Form S-8 and the Registration Statement (No.
333-94757) on Form S-3 of CheckFree Holdings Corporation of our reports dated
August 9, 1999 (except for Note 22 as to which the date is May 5, 2000),
appearing in and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A
No. 1 of CheckFree Holdings Corporation for the year ended June 30, 1999.


/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
July 7, 2000
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1951 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1951

             To suspend temporarily the duty on Gum Rosin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 28, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To suspend temporarily the duty on Gum Rosin.

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

SECTION 1. GUM ROSIN.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Gum Rosin (CAS No.  Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        8050-09-7)                                                         31/2011.......
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        3806.10.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Groemminger, Appellant.

Mikoll, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins County (Barrett, J.), rendered May 18, 1990, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of grand larceny in the fourth degree.

Defendant’s conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree arose out of events that occurred on December 21, 1989 at a department store in a shopping mall in Tompkins County. Testimony revealed that defendant served as the lookout for two codefendants, who allegedly engaged in a scheme involving removal of a filing cabinet from its box, placing 29 Nintendo games, two VCRs and two VCR movies, valued at $2,250, in the filing cabinet box and then purchasing the box at the filing cabinet price. Defendant contends on this appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdict, that the charge to the jury on circumstantial evidence was erroneous and that the submission of a written copy of the charge to the jury was reversible error. We disagree.

Although the testimony of witnesses was inconsistent, it was not hopelessly contradictory *(see, People v Politi,*161 AD2d 1045, 1047, *lv denied*76 NY2d 863) and questions of credibility were properly left for resolution by the jury *(see, People v Wells,*159 AD2d 799). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People *(see, supra),*it was legally sufficient to support the verdict and not against the weight of the evidence *(see, supra).*

Because defendant did not object to the jury charge, any issue regarding the charge has not been preserved for appellate review *(see, People v McChesney,*160 AD2d 1045). Moreover, the failure to give a circumstantial evidence charge was not error because there was direct evidence of defendant’s guilt before the jury *(see, People v Greiner,*156 AD2d 813, 816-817, l*v denied*75 NY2d 919). Finally, County Court did not err in submitting the entire charge in writing to the jury during its deliberations with the consent of defendant *(see, People v Bess,*107 AD2d 844, 846).

*984Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Levine, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1663 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1663

 To make available funds from the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act 
of 2008 for funding a voluntary employees' beneficiary association with 
           respect to former employees of Delphi Corporation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 11, 2009

   Mr. Brown introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To make available funds from the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act 
of 2008 for funding a voluntary employees' beneficiary association with 
           respect to former employees of Delphi Corporation.

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

SECTION 1. DELPHI CORPORATION VEBA.

    (a) Funding of VEBA.--
            (1) In general.--To the extent of the funding made 
        available under subsection (b), the Secretary of the Treasury 
        shall enter into an agreement with a volunteer employees' 
        beneficiary association (within the meaning of section 
        501(a)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) that is 
        established--
                    (A) after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
                and
                    (B) for the benefit of eligible separated employees 
                (and their dependents),
        to transfer amounts to such association for purposes of 
        establishing, or obtaining coverage under, a health care plan 
        for the benefit of such employees (and dependents).
            (2) Eligible separated employee.--For purposes of this 
        section, the term ``eligible separated employee'' means any 
        individual--
                    (A) who is separated from employment with Delphi 
                Corporation before the date of the enactment of this 
                Act, and
                    (B) with respect to whom the obligation of Delphi 
                Corporation or General Motors Corporation to provide 
                health care coverage has been discharged in a 
                proceeding under title 11, United States Code.
    (b) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under title I of the 
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-343; 12 
U.S.C. 5201 et seq.), the Secretary of the Treasury shall make 
available such amounts as are necessary to provide (to the extent 
practicable) health care coverage that is substantially the same as the 
coverage the obligation for which was so discharged, but not to exceed 
$3,000,000,000. Such amount shall be treated as having been made 
available for activities authorized by such Act.
                                 <all>
```