alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Rocco Curatolo, Appellant, v Rocco Postiglione, Respondent.

[767 NYS2d 894]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Weiss, J.), dated October 11, 2002, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1).

*481Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was injured when he fell from a scaffold while working on a construction project at the defendant’s home. The plaintiffs brother had agreed to assist the defendant with the project, which involved reinforcing the roof of the garage attached to the defendant’s one-family house, and the plaintiff accompanied his brother to the defendant’s home. While helping to install new beams in the garage roof, one of the planks on the scaffold on which the plaintiff was standing gave way. The plaintiff fell onto a metal fence, sustaining injuries.

The plaintiff commenced the instant action against the defendant based on Labor Law § 240 (1) and subsequently moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The plaintiff argued that the exemption from liability under section 240 (1) for owners of one-family dwellings did not apply in this case. The Supreme Court denied the motion on the ground that there was a triable issue of fact.

The owner of a one- or two-family dwelling is subject to liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) only if he or she directs or controls the work being performed, that is, where the owner supervises “the method and manner of the work” *(Duarte v East Hills Constr. Corp.,*274 AD2d 493, 494 [2000]). The plaintiff established as a matter of law that the defendant, who had been involved in the construction business prior to his retirement, was not entitled to the exemption from liability under section 240 (1) as he supervised the method and manner of the plaintiffs work. The evidence presented by the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding his entitlement to the exemption.

However, summary judgment was properly denied as there is an issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff was a volunteer and therefore not entitled to the protection of the statute. Labor Law § 240 (1) protects only those persons who are employed at a work site, and an “employee” is defined as “a mechanic, workingman or laborer working for another *for*hire” (Labor Law § 2 [5] [emphasis added]). *“A*volunteer who offers his services gratuitously cannot claim the protection afforded by [section 240]” *(Whelen v Warwick Val. Civic & Social Club,*47 NY2d 970, 971 [1979]). In view of the conflicting evidence as to whether the plaintiff was merely helping out the defendant as a friend or was expecting to be compensated, the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment was properly denied *(see Schroeder v Centro Pariso Tropical,*233 AD2d 314 [1996]; *Marks v Morehouse,*222 AD2d 785 [1995]).

The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit. Goldstein, J.P., Adams, Townes and Mastro, JJ., concur.
# New devices heat up classes in Georgia school

/ Published Feb. 5, 2020
Augusta, Georgia, 
Students at Alleluia Community School in Augusta, Georgia, were able to start the New Year with some new helpers to aid their learning thanks to the Defense Department’s Computers for Learning program managed by the Defense Logistics Agency.

Twenty-five Amazon Kindle Fire tablets found new life at the school after they were no longer needed by military users. Andy Hatfield, the school’s information technology director, received the units through the DLA Disposition Services site at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and quickly put them to use with the middle school students.

“They are really enjoying math and the new equipment --according to them 'toys,’” Hatfield said. “I was greatly surprised at the speed and quality of the work and effort.”

The school recently purchased a new online math program/app that Hatfield said runs perfectly on the Fire 7. He added that the tablets are also useful with school’s robotics club and their robotics kits.

 “Other teachers are also beginning to use the tablets for simple online research,” Hatfield said. “The ... app is also beginning to help our English Language Arts programs as well.”

 Hatfield says the school hopes to acquire some iPads for future robotics work and audio-visual projects if any of the tablets become available.

For Property Disposal Specialist Eric Garris, a DLA Disposition Services employee at Fort Bragg, seeing kids benefit from the work he and his colleagues produce is “one of the most rewarding things about working for DLA” and working with reutilization, transfer and donation programs like CFL.

“Most people in life, aspire to make a difference in this world in some small part,” Garris said. “Moments like this makes me feel like I’m achieving my aspirations.”

The CFL program, one of many RTD programs from DLA Disposition Services operates, was created to provide useful information technology equipment to schools and educational nonprofit organizations serving grades pre-kindergarten through 12th grade students. The program is designed to streamline the transfer of excess and surplus equipment to schools .For more information, visit the CFL’s website page call the DLA Customer Interaction Center at 877-352-2255.
No. 09-11230.

#### Wanda Schindley, Petitioner v. Memory Film Productions, et al.

562 U.S. 868, 131 S. Ct. 163,

178 L. Ed. 2d 97,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6642.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 356 Fed. Appx. 556.
No. 12-8005.

#### Dawkins *v.*Gonyea, Superintendent, Mohawk Correctional Facility.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Potter v. State

DA 16-0470

05/23/17

2017 MT 120N

Affirmed

Dist. 4 (Missoula)
|                                                                 
|-----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                 
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                   
|View History: Annual                                             
|View History: Annual                                             
|View History:                                                    
|                                                                 
|Georgia Natural Gas Exports to All Countries (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                 
|                                                                 
|Georgia Natural Gas Exports to All Countries (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                 

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2  | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |         |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 3,400 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 36,277 | 84,442 | 108,437 |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
Exhibit 31.1

302 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Walter H. Wulf, Jr., certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Monarch Cement
    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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
    report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
    establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
    defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
    and have:

    a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
        disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
        supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
        registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
        to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period
        in which this report is being prepared;

    b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
        and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
        the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
        the end of the period covered by this report based on such
        evaluation;

    c)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
        control over financial reporting that occurred during the
        registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,
        or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's
        internal control over financial reporting; and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
    our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
    to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's
    board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

    a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
        or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
        reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
        record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

    b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
        employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
        control over financial information.


Date: November 13, 2003

                                         /s/ Walter H. Wulf, Jr.
                                         Walter H. Wulf, Jr.
                                         President and Chairman of the Board
November 29, 2012

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DOUGLAS MATTHEW JONES, Appellant

NO. 14-12-00602-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having 

considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court 

orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
# DLA Distribution Anniston’s Black recognized as the Vehicle/ Material Handling Equipment Management Civilian Supervisor/Leader of the Year 

/ Published Aug. 31, 2020
ANNISTON, Ala., 
Derrick Black, equipment specialist and accountable property officer, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Anniston, Alabama, was recognized as the Vehicle/Material Handling Equipment Management Civilian Supervisor/Leader of the Year for outstanding performance during 2019.

Black managed over 200 pieces of equipment valued at over $66 million. As the APO, Black identified and turned in several pieces of excess equipment valued at over $400,000, resulting in Black receiving a commendable rating during the Accountable Property Compliance Audit from DLA headquarters. The auditor stated Black set the standard for what property accountability should be at all DLA sites, additionally, the auditor took some of the procedures that Black uses back as best practices for other DLA sites to use. 

Black aggressively worked with Anniston’s Directorate of Public Works to maintain the organization’s aging fleet of transporter trucks and other equipment. These trucks are critical to the mission of the organization moving material between several vital points of operation. His astute management of equipment and close attention to detail in managing the organization’s material handling equipment fleet reduced the average age of the MHE fleet to five years, far exceeding the average at other DLA distribution centers. 

Recently, Black was able to acquire a new state-of-the art tractor trailer for DDAA. This new asset has increased production, not to mention the morale of the vehicle operator, which in turn has increased the movement of material for the organization. 

Black’s significant contribution to improve global distribution excellence included his establishment of a preventative maintenance contract for the organization’s 80-ton Gantry Crane “Clyde,” an instrumental piece of equipment for receiving and shipping of combat vehicles. The contract provides the ability to have outside experts perform periodic maintenance inspections on the crane and provides the ability to procure a temporary crane in the event it is not operational for an extended time. This was instrumental in repairing a major item on the crane without any loss of production. 

An invaluable asset to DDAA and the Warfighter, Black’s professional performance, industrious attitude, and devotion to duty are unsurpassed by anyone in DDAA.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Warren, Appellant.

[770 NYS2d 266]

Appeal from a judgment of Ontario County Court (Doran, J.), entered March 26, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of gang assault in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum; County Court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. Although defendant was not orally advised of his *Miranda*rights prior to questioning, he was given a written *1318copy of those rights after he acknowledged that he could read and write, and he was observed reading them before signing a written waiver. Contrary to defendant’s contention, “it is not essential that the [Miranda] warnings ... be given in oral rather than written form” *(United States v Sledge,*546 F2d 1120, 1122 [1977] [4th Cir], *cert denied*430 US 910 [1977];.see 2 LaFave, Israel and King, Criminal Procedure § 6.8 [c], at 577 [2d ed]; Ringel, Searches and Seizures, Arrests and Confessions § 26.5; *see also People v Gaylord,*210 AD2d 980 [1994], *lv denied*84 NY2d 1031 [1995]). In making our determination, we emphasize that defendant’s sole contention is that *Miranda*warnings must be given orally. We remind the People, however, that “a heavy burden rests upon [them] to prove that a person in custody did knowingly and intelligently waive his privilege against self-incrimination and his right to retained or appointed counsel, . . . and, although each particular case must depend upon its own facts, . . . the preferred practice would include both an oral recitation of the required *Miranda*warnings coupled with the delivery of a written explanation thereof to the accused and the request that he execute a legally sufficient waiver prior to the commencement of custodial interrogation” *(Sledge,*546 F2d at 1122).. We have considered the remaining contentions of defendant relating to his guilty plea and conclude that they are without merit. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Pine, Wisner, Hurlbutt and Gorski, JJ.
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO.

Leslie C. Abbott

Senior Attorney

1901 L Street, N.W. – Suite 640

Washington, D.C. 20036

(202) 263-6285

(202) 263-6291 Fax

Leslie.abbott@wnco.com

_______________________________________________________________________________

June 8, 2012

Via email and regulations.gov

Esta Rosenberg

Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing Division

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Application of AirTran Airways for Renewal of Exemption 

Authority (ATL/BWI-CUN); Docket OST-2005-21134

Dear Ms. Rosenberg:

This letter is to confirm that AirTran Airways (“AirTran”) has polled all carriers on 

the service list attached to the above-referenced Application, and all carriers responded 

that they have no objections. Accordingly, AirTran requests that the exemption authority 

renewal specified in the Application be granted as soon as possible.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________

Leslie C. Abbott

cc: Susan Kurland, DOT

Paul Gretch, DOT

 Brian Hedberg, DOT

Brett Kruger, DOT

All parties on the Service List
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.:

  As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of
our report dated February 4, 2002 included in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.'s Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001 into Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Inc.'s previously filed Registration Statements File Nos. 333-52953, 333-
83823, 333-82775, 333-35950 and 333-60903.

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Los Angeles, California
February 4, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET OF EPIX MEDICAL, INC. AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND FOR THE TWELVE MONTH
PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001027702
<NAME>                        EPIX MEDICAL, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                             369,454
<SECURITIES>                                    28,731,747
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,618,902
<PP&E>                                           5,732,667
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (2,871,390)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,903,219
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,026,160
<BONDS>                                            771,647
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           114,584
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,388,421
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,903,219
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,780,985
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,605,894
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  61,132
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (13,998,229)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (13,998,229)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (13,998,229)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (1.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (1.23)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 21**

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF AMERICAN DENTAL PARTNERS, INC.**

 

PDHC, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation 

 

Texas Dental Partners, LP, a Texas limited partnership 

 

Texas Dental Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

Northpark Dental Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of Louisiana, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of Pennsylvania, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

Apple Park Associates, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

American Dental Partners of Ohio, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

Innovative Practice Concepts, Inc., an Arizona corporation 

 

American Dental Professional Services, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of Virginia, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of Maryland, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company

 

American Dental Partners of Alabama, LLC, a Delaware limited liabilitycompany 

American Dental Partners of Oklahoma, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of North Carolina, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of California, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

ADP of New York, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

National Dental Alliance, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

American Dental Partners of Tennessee, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

Voss Dental Lab Inc., a New York corporation 

 

American Dental Partners of Michigan, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

American Dental Partners of Missouri, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
160 A.3d 1291

#### IN THE MATTER OF DONNA M. CONROY, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 019541986)

June 6, 2017

ORDER

DONNA M. CONROY of CRANFORD, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1986, having pleaded guilty in the United *245States District Court for the District of New Jersey to a two-count information charging her with making false entries to deceive the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and First State Bank (FSB), in violation of 18 *U.S.C.*§ 1005 and 2, and to conspiracy to deceive the FDIC and FSB and to influence the FDIC, in violation of 18 *U.S.C.*§ 317, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that pursuant to *Rule*1:20—13(b)(1), DONNA M. CONROY is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending the final resolution of ethics proceedings against her, effective immediately, and until the further Order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that DONNA M. CONROY be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of her suspension; and it is further

ORDERED that DONNA M. CONROY comply with *Rule*1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this state.