alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AZON METREX HEYWOOD

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 1 3

- 6127

_____ ________________________/

Opinion filed February 25, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Suzanne Bass , Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Richard M. Bracey, III, Assistant Public

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant

.

Pam ela Jo Bondi, Attor ney General, and Michael McDermott , Assistant Attorney

General, T allahassee

, for Appellee

.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

BENTON, WETHERELL , and SWANSON , JJ., CONCUR.
#### Linda Sledge, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Cecil Sledge, Deceased, Appellant, v City of New York, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), entered August 15, 1989, as granted the motion by the defendant City of New; York for summary judgment, and (2) an order of the same court dated April 25, 1990, which denied the plaintiff’s motion to renew her opposition to the motion by the defendant City of New York for summary judgment.

Ordered that the appeal from the order entered August 15, 1989, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated April 25, 1990; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated April 25, 1990, is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

While on duty on the evening of January 28, 1980, the plaintiff’s decedent, Police Officer Cecil Sledge, stopped an automobile driven by the defendant Salvatore Desamo. As Officer Sledge approached the vehicle, he was shot by Desamo, and fell to the ground. When Desamo attempted to flee in his *535vehicle, Officer Sledge was caught beneath the undercarriage, and was dragged to his death. The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for Officer Sledge’s wrongful death. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint against the City of New York. We affirm. Officer Sledge’s services were not "sufficiently separate and apart from the negligent acts” which caused his fatal injuries *(Starkey v Trancamp Contr. Corp.,*152 AD2d 358, 363; *see, Santangelo v State of New York,*71 NY2d 393; *Guadagno v Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co.,*155 AD2d 981).

We have considered the plaintiff’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
PURCELL LAMAR BAGLEY,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-4927

Opinion filed April 4, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction.

Purcell Lamar Bagley, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Holly N. Simcox, Assistant Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, C.J., SWANSON and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Frank C. Spencer, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cogdell Spencer Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly 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 presentedin this quarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under the Company’s supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this quarterly report the Company’s conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal 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, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on the Company’s mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditorsand the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.       Date: May 15, 2006 By: /s/ Frank C. Spencer           Name: Frank C. Spencer    Title: Chief Executive Officer  
21
# L_2006071EN.01000901.xml

| 10.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 71/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 71/9

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 412/2006

of 9 March 2006

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 3 to 9 March 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 March 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 9 March 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 15.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

3

---
# L_2006164EN.01002601.xml

| 16.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 164/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 164/26

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 882/2006

of 15 June 2006

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 9 to 15 June 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 June 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 June 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 15.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

3

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Worthington, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from so much of a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (Mallon, J.), imposed June 25, 1990, as, upon sentencing him to a term of five years probation, upon his conviction of attempted burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, denied youthful offender treatment, required him to make restitution in the amount of $184.80, and imposed a mandatory surcharge.

Ordered that the sentence is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof requiring the defendant to make restitution; as so modified, the sentence is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

Inasmuch as restitution did not comprise part of the defendant’s plea agreement *(see, People v Cowan,*168 AD2d 509), and there is inadequate evidence in the record to support the sentencing court’s imposition of restitution, we conclude that the portion of the sentence directing the payment of restitution should be deleted *(see,*Penal Law § 60.27 [2]; *People v Smith,*168 AD2d 524).

We reject the defendant’s remaining contentions. His challenge to the payment of the mandatory surcharge is academic in view of the foregoing determination *(see,*Penal Law § 60.35 [6]), and the sentencing court’s denial of youthful offender treatment did not constitute an improvident exercise of discretion under the circumstances presented *(see,*CPL 720.20 [1] [a]). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Sullivan, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
### ATTACHMENT D

Letter dated May 3 0 , 2007, submitted by Chemstone

in support of its BART determination
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED March 7, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-51032 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANCISCO JAVIER MARTINEZ-SANDOVAL, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-560-ALL

-------------------- Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Francisco Javier Martinez-Sandoval raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31**

 

Certification

 

I, Stephen M.Abelman, certify that:

 

1.                                       Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K and8-K/A containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periodsincluded in the year covered by this annual report, of CRIIMI MAE FinancialCorporation;

 

2.                                     Basedon my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading as of the last day of theperiod covered by this annual report;

 

3.                                       Basedon my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to beprovided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, orsimilar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in thesereports;

 

4.                                       Iam responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer under thepooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and based upon my knowledge andthe annual compliance review required under that agreement, and except asdisclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under thatagreement; and

 

5.                                       Thereports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer’scompliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report providedby an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliancewith the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similarprocedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreementthat is included in these reports.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties: U.S. National Bank Association.

 

Date:March 30, 2004

 

 
| /s/ Stephen  M. Abelman   |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
| Stephen M.  Abelman       |
| Executive  Vice President |
| Asset  Management         |

 

1

----
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                 PERSONNEL GROUP OF AMERICA, INC. AND AFFILIATES


                            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 Personnel Group of America,
Inc.(the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the period ending December 29, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, James C. Hunt, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies 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.


/s/ James C. Hunt
--------------------------
James C. Hunt
Chief Financial Officer
April 14, 2003
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Charles M. Handy, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cogdell Spencer Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly 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 presentedin this quarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under the Company’s supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this quarterly report the Company’s conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal 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, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on the Company’s mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditorsand the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.       Date: May 15, 2006 By: /s/ Charles M. Handy           Name: Charles M. Handy    Title: Chief Financial Officer  
22
**Exhibit24****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     Each director and/or officer of CheckFree Corporation (the “Corporation”) whose signatureappears below hereby appoints Peter J. Kight, David E. Mangum, and Curtis A. Loveland as theundersigned’s attorneys or any of them individually as the undersigned’s attorney, to sign, in theundersigned’s name and behalf and in any and all capacities stated below, and to cause to be filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”), the Corporation’s Annual Report onForm 10-K (the “Form 10-K”) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, and likewise to sign and filewith the Commission any and all amendments to the Form 10-K, and the Corporation hereby alsoappoints such persons as its attorneys-in-fact and each of them as its attorney-in-fact with likeauthority to sign and file the Form 10-K and any amendments thereto granting to each suchattorney-in-fact full power of substitution and revocation, and hereby ratifying all that any suchattorney-in-fact or the undersigned’s substitute may do by virtue hereof.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this 24th day of August, 2007.     *Signature*   *Title*     /s/ Peter J. Kight      Peter J. Kight   Chairman of the Board and