alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Goldie C. Sommer, a Suspended Attorney.

[56 NYS3d 354]

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1981 after being admitted in New Jersey in 1976, where she maintains an office for the practice of law. Following respondent’s May 2013 conviction in the United States District Court of the District of New Jersey of the federal crime of conspiracy to structure transactions in order to evade a bank reporting requirement *(see*18 USC § 371; *see also*31 USC § 5324 [a] [3]; [d] [1]), the Supreme Court of New Jersey suspended respondent from the practice of law for one year, effective May 22, 2013 *(Matter of Sommer,*217 NJ 359, 89 A3d 580 [2014]). Upon the motion of the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, this Court, by July 2015 order, thereafter suspended respondent from the practice of law for one year by reason of the discipline imposed upon her in New Jersey (130 AD3d 1359 [2015]). Respondent, who has since been reinstated in New Jersey, now moves for reinstatement in this state by motion marked returnable April 24, 2017 *(see*Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16). The Attorney Grievance Committee and the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection have advised that they have no objection to respondent’s motion.

Our examination of the materials submitted upon respondent’s reinstatement application indicates that she has made all proper disclosures and has complied with the provisions of the order of suspension, as well as this Court’s rules regarding the conduct of suspended attorneys *{see*Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.15). Further, we are satisfied that respondent has complied with the requirements of the applicable rules regarding reinstatement of attorneys who have been suspended for more than six months *{see*Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [b]), that she possesses the character and general fitness to resume *1531the practice of law in this state, and that her reinstatement would be in the public interest. Accordingly, the application is granted and respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in this state, effective immediately.

Peters, P.J., Garry, Lynch, Rose and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that respondent’s application for reinstatement is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.
Exhibit 10.3

                    PERFORMANCE-BASED ANNUAL INCENTIVE AWARDS
                           FOR CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          AND CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER

The Compensation Committee of Westwood Holdings Group, Inc. (the "Company") and
the stockholders of the Company have approved performance-based annual incentive
awards ("Annual Incentive Awards") for the Company's Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Investment Officer, as follows:

         o        For the 2006 fiscal year, and for each subsequent year until
                  revised by the Compensation Committee ("Committee"), the Chief
                  Executive Officer's Annual Incentive Award will equal not more
                  than 3% of the Company's adjusted pre-tax income (subject to
                  the Committee's discretion to reduce the amount of the Annual
                  Incentive Award to less than the 3% formula amount).

         o        For the 2006 fiscal year, and for each subsequent year until
                  revised by the Compensation Committee, the Chief Investment
                  Officer's Annual Incentive Award will equal not more than 8%
                  of the Company's adjusted pre-tax income (subject to the
                  Committee's discretion to reduce the amount of the Annual
                  Incentive Award to less than the 8% formula amount).

         o        "Adjusted pre-tax income" will be determined based on the
                  Company's audited financial statements as the Company's income
                  before income tax, increased by (i) the expense incurred for
                  the year for the Annual Incentive Awards to the Chief
                  Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer, (ii) the
                  expense incurred for the year for Performance-Based Restricted
                  Stock Awards to the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                  Investment Officer and (iii) the expense incurred for the year
                  for incentive compensation for all of the Company's other
                  employees.

         o        The Annual Incentive Awards will be paid only following
                  certification by the Committee of the amounts earned in
                  accordance with the formula, and each officer, as a condition
                  to receiving payment of his or her award, shall be required to
                  remain employed by the Company on the payment date, which
                  shall be no later than March 15 of the next fiscal year.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Aquila, Inc.**

**Chief Executive Officer**

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

|   | I, Richard C. Green, certify that: |
|--------|------------------------------------|

 

|   | 1. | Aquila, Inc.’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2006 accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | 2. | The information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Aquila, Inc. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Dated: November 2, 2006

 

|   | /s/ Richard C. Green |
|--------|----------------------|

|   | Richard C. Green |
|--------|------------------|

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer 

Aquila, Inc.
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

 

Solely forthe purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, the undersigned Presidentand Chief Executive Officer of Pierre Foods, Inc. (the “Company”), herebycertify, based on my knowledge, that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofthe Company for the quarter ended December 1, 2007 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| /S/  NORBERT E. WOODHAMS |
|--------------------------|
| Norbert  E. Woodhams     |
| January 15,  2008   |

 

 

Solely forthe purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, the undersigned ChiefFinancial Officer of Pierre Foods, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify,based on my knowledge, that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of theCompany for the quarter ended December 1, 2007 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| /S/  JOSEPH W. MEYERS  |
|------------------------|
| Joseph  W. Meyers      |
| January 15,  2008 |

 

 

 

38

----
|                                                                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                                       
|                                                                                                    
|Price of U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Finland ((Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet))
|                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                    
|Price of U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Finland ((Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet))
|                                                                                                    

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar   | Apr  | May   | Jun  | Jul  | Aug  | Sep  | Oct | Nov  | Dec  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | ----- | ---- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ---- | ---- | --- | ---- | -----
|2022                                                                                                                              | --  | --  | --    | --   | --    | --   | --   | --   | --   | --  | --   | 10.68
|2023                                                                                                                              | --  | --  | 18.43 | --   | 14.11 | 5.35 | 7.08 | 6.03 | 7.62 | --  | 5.08 | 11.91
|2024                                                                                                                              | --  | --  | --    | 5.64 |       |      |      |      |      |     |      |      
|                                                                                                                                 
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/28/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 7/31/2024
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Douglas Blackmon, Petitioner, v Commissioner of Corrections et al., Respondents.

[56 NYS3d 885]

Writ of habeas corpus in the nature of an application for bail reduction upon Queens County indictment No. 2588/16, and application by the petitioner for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.

Ordered that the application for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the writ is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination of the Supreme Court, Queens County, was not an improvident exercise of discretion, and did not violate “constitutional or statutory standards” *(People ex rel. Klein v Krueger,*25 NY2d 497, 499 [1969]; *see People ex rel. Rosenthal v Wolfson,*48 NY2d 230 [1979]).

Eng, P.J., Roman, LaSalle and Connolly, JJ., concur.
# DLA Distribution Bahrain Staff Sgt. Morales promoted in brief ceremony

/ Published Dec. 9, 2021
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
U.S. Army Staff Sgt. George Edward Morales was promoted during a small ceremony at Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, Bahrain Oct. 31. Morales was promoted from Sgt. to Staff Sgt.

Morales began his Army career September 2009 and served for 12 years so far with two tours in Afghanistan. He has earned five Army Commendation Medals, four Army Achievement Medals, and four Good Conduct Medals.

Starting as a supply clerk for the 101st airborne Morales has made continuous positive impacts on various supply programs anywhere he’s been stationed.Currently working at DDNB, Morales hopes to take lessons learned there and apply them as his career moves forward.
# Employee investments could be a conflict of interest 

/ Published March 17, 2021
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
The Defense Logistics Agency General Counsel reminds employees that while investing in the stock market is easier than ever, there may be limitations on what stock they can own.

If employees’ duties involve interacting with a company they’ve invested money in, they may be violating 18 U.S.C. Section 208, a criminal statute, said DLA Ethics Counselor Claes Lewenhaupt. 

“You cannot buy or own stock, for example, with Amazon, Microsoft or Dell, and then participate in a contract between DLA and one of those companies without potentially violating the statute,” he said.

DLA is one of the largest buying agencies in the government and contracts with thousands of companies, he added. DLA ethics counselors can help employees determine if a true conflict of interest exists between the stock owner and their duties.  

Employees who are required to file financial disclosure forms must report the stocks they own as well as the investments of their spouse or dependent children. 

“If your spouse or dependent children own stock in a company, it is imputed to you – it’s like you own it,” Lewenhaupt said, adding this is true even if the stock is in a spouse’s Individual Retirement Account or 401K. 

“Before you get in the game, take ‘stock’ of what your official duties are and whether you might be creating a conflict of interest when purchasing a stock,” he said.

DLA's General Counsel staff reminds employees that even during the pandemic and mass telework, they should remain vigilant and aware of potential conflicts of interest. DLA leaders are committed to ensuring employees uphold high ethical standards as they support warfighters and whole of government while remaining accountable to the American taxpayers.

For more information and answers to other ethics questions, employees can go to DLA’s ethics page.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 1 , 2014 

# Order

Clerk July 1 , 2014

146763 ( 83 )

HEATHER LYNN HANNAY,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 146763

v COA: 307616

Court of Claims: 09

- 000116

- MZ

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,

Defendant

- Appellant

.

___________________________________ /

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the Michigan Municipal League to file

an amicus curiae brief that addresses a common issue in this case and in No. 147335

, Hunter v Sisco

, is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on June 26 , 2014, is accepted

for filing.
#### State of Florida, ex rel. E. H. Jones, vs. J. J. Fernandez,

143 So. 642.

En Banc.

Opinion filed September 27, 1932.

*L. E. Womack,*for Petitioner.

*850Terrell, J.

This petition for quo warranto seeks to test the right of respondent to hold and exercise the title and privilege vested in him as nominee of the Democratic Party to the office of County Commissioner, First County Commissioner District of Hillsborough County.

The facts presented and the questions raised are similar to those involved in State on relation of Ben Watkins vs. J. M. Fernandez, decided this date. The rule to' show cause will therefore be denied on authority of that case.

Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur.

Ellis, J., agrees to the conclusion.
No. 09-1552.

#### William Driscoll, Petitioner v. CB Richard Ellis, Inc., et al.

562 U.S. 840, 131 S. Ct. 204,

178 L. Ed. 2d 45,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6058.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, denied.
No. 12-6484.

#### Rollins *v.*Louisiana.

Sup. Ct. La. Certio-rari denied.
No. 09-11063.

#### Robert Juarbe, Petitioner v. Burl Cain, Warden.

562 U.S. 860, 131 S. Ct. 136,

178 L. Ed. 2d 82,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6250.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
#### Brooklyn S., Matter of (Stafania Q.—Devin S.)

4th Dept: 150 AD3d 1698

denied
2017-1678.

#### Taylor v. Burkes.

In Habeas Corpus. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Donnell, Kennedy, French, Fischer, and DeWine, JJ., concur.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
EL ECTRONI C CI TATI ON: 2011 FE D App. 0013P (6th Cir.) File Na me: 11b0013p.06 BA NK RU P TC Y A P P ELLA TE P AN EL OF THE SI XT H C IR CU IT In re: JENNY FO STER and REESE FOSTER, ) ) De bto rs . )

_____________________________________ ) ) ) SUSAN RHI EL , TRUSTEE, ) ) Appellant, ) No. 11-8023 ) v . ) ) B AC HO ME L OA

NS S ERV I CI

NG , L P, )

) Appellee

. ) )

Appea l from the United States B ankruptc y Court for the Southern District of Ohio Case No. 09- 63067; Adversa ry Case No. 10- 2016 Dec ided and F iled: November 10, 2011 B e fo re : H ARRI S, RH OD ES, and SHE A- STO NU M, B ank ru ptc y Ap pe lla te Pane l Judg e s.

____________________ CO UN SEL O N B RI E F: Susan L . Rhiel, RHI EL& A SSOC I ATES CO., L PA, Colum bus, Ohio, for Appellant. Amelia A . Bow er, PLUNKETT COONEY, Columbus, Ohio, for Appe llee.

____________________ OP IN ION

____________________ ARTHUR I . HARRI S, Ba nkruptcy Appellate Panel J udg e. After revie wing the record a nd the par ties’ brief s, the Panel dete rmines that the bankr uptcy court did not err in g rantingsummary-2-

judgme nt ag ainst the trustee a nd in favor of

BA C Home L oans Servicing , L P. We theref ore a ffirm for the r easons state d in the ban k rupt cy court’s w ell-written opinion enter ed on Mar ch 23, 2011, Rhiel v. BAC HomeLoans Servicing, LP, ( In reFo ste r) , 448 B.R. 914 (B ankr. S.D. Ohio 2011), and for the r easons state d in the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s opi nion enter ed on June 24, 2011, Rogan v. Fifth Third Mortgage Co., (I n re Rowe) , 452 B.R. 591 (B .A.P. 6th Cir. 2011) (ana ly zing a similar issue under K entucky

law).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION FROM THE FORM 10-QSB FOR
THE THREE  MONTHS  ENDED  JUNE 30,  1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                         213
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                1,385
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                    814
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                             2,459
<PP&E>                                                       3,572
<DEPRECIATION>                                               1,976
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               4,870
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        1,550
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                       369
<OTHER-SE>                                                   3,123
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 4,870
<SALES>                                                      3,363
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                             3,363
<CGS>                                                        2,492
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                3,142
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              17
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                221
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    92
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            128
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   128
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0.03

        

</TABLE>
No. 09-11170.

#### David Rucker, Petitioner v. Jim Hamlet, Warden.

562 U.S. 865, 131 S. Ct. 152,

178 L. Ed. 2d 91,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6490.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 369 Fed. Appx. 786.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The following schedule contains summarized financial information extracted
from the Mountain Fuel Supply Co. Statements of Income and Balance Sheets
for the period ended March 31, 1997, and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such unaudited financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   79,441
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      8,154
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               120,579
<PP&E>                                         827,208
<DEPRECIATION>                                 333,171
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 635,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          130,183
<BONDS>                                        175,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            4,808
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        22,974
<OTHER-SE>                                     209,231
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   635,352
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               175,313
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  124,615
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,676
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,342
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 36,403
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,094
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,309
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,309
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>