alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Paul Mitchell, Petitioner, v J. Hessell, as Tier III Hearing Officer, Collins Correctional Facility, Respondent.

[768 NYS2d 855]

Mercure, J.P.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services, which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

In December 2001, a correction officer requested that petitioner, an inmate at Collins Correctional Facility in Erie *1229County, undergo a urinalysis test after observing petitioner exhibiting lethargic behavior. Two days after the sample was placed in a refrigerator, another correction officer removed it and performed two SYVA ETS drug detection tests, both of which were positive for the presence of opiates. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting use of a controlled substance. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, respondent found petitioner guilty and the Commissioner of Correctional Services affirmed upon administrative appeal. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the determination.

We reject petitioner’s argument that the evidence at the hearing was insufficient to support a determination of guilt. The misbehavior report, the two positive urinalysis test results, along with substantiating documentation, a drug cross-reactivity manual and the hearing testimony provide substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt *(see Matter of Coppins v Cerio,*307 AD2d 486, 486 [2003]; *Matter of Devivo v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs.,*306 AD2d 600, 601 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 515 [2003]). Despite petitioner’s claim that the correction officer who performed the tests stated that he could not explain why identical numbers appeared on both petitioner’s and another inmate’s test results, the officer explained that it was the calibration numbers that were identical, not the actual test results for the inmates. In addition, we conclude that the testimony of two nurses and the SYVA cross-reactivity manual refuted petitioner’s assertion that his prescription medicine caused false positive test results *(see Matter of Devivo v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., supra*at 601; *Matter of Johnson v Goord,*268 AD2d 732, 732 [2000]). Petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his argument that his due process rights were violated by respondent’s reliance on allegedly ex parte communications and failure to call certain witnesses, have been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit.

Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
No. 09-1422.

#### Paul S. Minor, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 833, 131 S. Ct. 124,

178 L. Ed. 2d 33,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6208.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 590 F.3d 325.
2016-1755.

#### State ex rel. Evans v. McGrath.

Franklin App. No. 16AP-458, 2016-Ohio-7875. Reported at 161 Ohio St.3d 629, 2017-0hio-8707, 90 N.E.3d 916. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied. On motion for court to rule upon all propositions of law. Motion denied.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
No. 09-1329.

#### John F. Peoples, Petitioner v. Howard I. Langer, et al.

562 U.S. 830, 131 S. Ct. 84,

178 L. Ed. 2d 27,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6418.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 361 Fed. Appx. 392.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 28, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00 134

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF D.R., ET AL

,

Appellant

From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018PA00445

Honorable Genie Wright, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The Appellant ’ s

, N.H., First Motion for E xtension of T i me to File Brief is hereby

GRANTED. The appellant ’ s brief is d ue on or before June 3, 2019.

_________________________________ Irene Rios , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 28th day of May, 2019

.

___________________________________ K eith E. H ottle

, Clerk of Court
II

Calendar No. 585

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2198

[Report No. 103–343]

To authorize a certificate of documentation for the vessel SERENITY.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 16 (legislative day, JUNE 7), 1994

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

referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

AUGUST 19 (legislative day, AUGUST 18), 1994

Reported by Mr. HOLLINGS, without amendment

A BILL

To authorize a certificate of documentation for the vessel

SERENITY.

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

3 That notwithstanding sections 12106, 12107, and 12108

4 of title 46, United States Code, and section 27 of the Mer5 chant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), as applica6 ble on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary

7 of Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation
2

S 2198 RS

1 for the vessel SERENITY, United States official number

2 1021393.

Calendar No. 585

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2198

[Report No. 103–343]

A BILL

To authorize a certificate of documentation for the

vessel SERENITY.

AUGUST 19 (legislative day, AUGUST 18), 1994

Reported without amendment
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE THIRD
QUARTER REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                               0000065873
<NAME>                              ALLTEL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                                28,203
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        554,098
<ALLOWANCES>                                          20,688
<INVENTORY>                                           83,632
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     726,766
<PP&E>                                             5,001,253
<DEPRECIATION>                                     2,003,225
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     5,173,935
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                560,993
<BONDS>                                            1,687,411
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  6,455
<PREFERRED>                                            9,216
<COMMON>                                             189,603
<OTHER-SE>                                         1,845,355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       5,173,935
<SALES>                                              515,646
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   2,386,117
<CGS>                                                342,517
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      1,978,227
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     120,280
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    98,281
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      309,369
<INCOME-TAX>                                         114,564
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  194,805
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                         194,805
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           1.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0
        


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Ferguson, Appellant.

[66 NYS3d 118]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic R. Mas-saro, J.), rendered February 10, 2015, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted rape in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish attempted first-degree rape because there was no evidence of penetration is unpreserved for appellate review *(People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. We also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations.

Unlike the completed crime, attempted rape does not require any proof of penetration. The victim’s testimony about defendant’s unsuccessful efforts to engage her in sexual intercourse by force overwhelmingly established both that defendant intended to commit rape and that he came dangerously close to doing so *(see e.g. People v Jackson,*11 AD3d 369 [1st Dept 2004], *lv denied*3 NY3d 757 [2004]; *People v Tenden,*232 AD2d 244 [1st Dept 1996], *lv denied*89 NY2d 947 [1997]).

The court properly permitted the victim to testify as to her understanding of the term “penetration,” because this explained why she initially told the police, medical personnel and her friend that no penetration had occurred. The victim was obviously not rendering an opinion on the law, and defendant’s arguments in this regard are without merit. In any event, any error in admitting that testimony was harmless, because defendant was not convicted of the completed crime of rape (see *People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230 [1975]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur— Richter, J.P., Tom, Kapnick, Kern and Moulton, JJ.
No. 09-10572.

#### Cerron Thomas Hooks, Petitioner v. Gerald J. Branker, Warden.

562 U.S. 847, 131 S. Ct. 90,

178 L. Ed. 2d 57,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6066.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 348 Fed. Appx. 854.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                               ATL PRODUCTS, INC.

                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                Year Ended March 31
                                                       --------------------------------------
                                                          1995          1996          1997
                                                       ----------    ----------    ----------
<S>                                                     <C>           <C>           <C>      
Average shares outstanding                              8,005,000     8,005,000     8,118,014

Shares related to SAB No. 83                              479,455       479,455       479,455
                                                       ----------    ----------    ----------
Shares used in computing net income (loss) per share    8,484,455     8,484,455     8,597,469
                                                       ==========    ==========    ==========

Net income (loss)                                      (7,515,000)   (1,189,000)    3,931,000

Income (loss) per share                                $    (0.89)   $    (0.14)   $     0.46
                                                       ==========    ==========    ==========
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                                   EXHIBIT 27

     FINANCIAL   DATA  SCHEDULE  THIS  SCHEDULE   CONTAINS   SUMMARY   FINANCIAL
INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM THE  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  AND  RELATED  FOOTNOTES
THERETO, OF KIDS STUFF, INC.


</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                                    <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           dec-31-1998
<CASH>                                                 25,426
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          251,544
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            1,925,915
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       2,924,901
<PP&E>                                                 458,632
<DEPRECIATION>                                         120,212
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         5,028,134
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  3,241,258
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            5,000
<COMMON>                                               3,513
<OTHER-SE>                                             1,778,363
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           5,028,134
<SALES>                                                14,172,864
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       14,172,864
<CGS>                                                  8,712,876
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          12,679,328
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       1,486,889
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     60,630
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (35,788)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (35,788)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (35,788)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (.01)
        

</TABLE>
#### Starkey v. Segars

08/10/2016

131 EAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Super., 144 A.3d 198
---

---

# Exhibit 15.2

# Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors
Elbit Imaging Ltd.:

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 of Elbit Imaging Ltd. (Registration
No. 333-130852, No. 333-117509 and No. 333-136684) of our report dated June 30, 2008 with
respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Plaza Centers N.V. (formerly: Plaza Centers
(Europe) B.V) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 and the related consolidated statements of
income, changes in shareholders equity and cash flows for each of the years in the
two-year period ended December 31, 2007 prepared in accordance with International
Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board,
which report appear in the December 31, 2007 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Elbit Imaging
Ltd.

/s/ KPMG Hungária Kft.
KPMG Hungária Kft. 
Budapest, Hungary

June 27, 2008



---

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Hernandez, Appellant.

[60 NYS3d 808]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Stolz, J.), rendered on or about June 26, 2013, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same' is hereby affirmed.

Concur— Friedman, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Kapnick, Kern and Singh, JJ.
No. 09-10567.

#### Clarence Darrin Myles, Petitioner v. Michigan.

562 U.S. 846, 131 S. Ct. 90,

178 L. Ed. 2d 57,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6051.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari of the Circuit Court of Michigan, Saginaw County, denied.
Exhibit 32.1



MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)



The undersigned, Laura B. Hamilton, the Chief Executive Officer of MTS Systems Corporation (the Company), has executed this Certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 28, 2008 (the Report).



The undersigned 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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.

Date: August 4, 2008



/s/ LAURA B. HAMILTONLaura B. HamiltonChief Executive Officer






---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.44


                         AMENDMENT TO LETTER AGREEMENT


     Reference is made to the Letter Agreement dated May 19, 1997 (the
"Agreement") between Premier HealthCare, a division of Bock, Benjamin & Co.
(the "Advisor"), and Physicians' Specialty Corp. (the "Company").  The Advisor
and the Company hereby agree that, as of the date hereof, the Agreement is
hereby amended as follows:

     1.   Paragraph 2(a)(A) of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the
dollar amount "$5,000" and adding the dollar amount "$12,500" in lieu thereof;
and

     2.   Exhibit "B" to the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the number
"six and one-quarter (6.25)" throughout Exhibit "B" and adding the number
"seven and one-half (7.5)" in lieu thereof.

     The amendments set forth above are limited precisely as written and shall
not be deemed to be (a) a consent to, or waiver or modification of, any other
term or condition of the Agreement or (b) prejudice any rights or rights which
the Advisor and the Company may now have or may have in the future under or in
connection with the Agreement.  Except as expressly modified hereby, the terms
and provisions of the Agreement are and shall remain in full force and effect
and the Advisor and the Company hereby reconfirm their obligations thereunder.

     This Amendment may be executed by the parties hereto in several
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which
shall constitute together but one and the same agreement.

     THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA
GOVERNING CONTRACTS MADE AND TO BE PERFORMED IN SUCH STATE, WITHOUT GIVING
EFFECT TO PRINCIPLES OF CONFLICTS OF LAW

Date:  March 18, 1998              PREMIER HEALTHCARE,
                                   A Division of Bock, Benjamin & Co.


                                   By    /s/ Gerald R. Benjamin
                                      ----------------------------------------
                                      Name:  Gerald R. Benjamin, Principal


                                   PHYSICIANS' SPECIALITY CORP.


                                   By    /s/ Richard D. Ballard
                                      ----------------------------------------
                                      Name:  Richard D. Ballard
                                      Title: Chief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 32.1





MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)





The undersigned, Laura B. Hamilton, the Chief Executive Officer of MTS Systems Corporation (the “Company”), has executed this Certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended January 1, 2011 (the “Report”).





The undersigned 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.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.





Date: February 3, 2011





/s/ LAURA B. HAMILTONLaura B. HamiltonChair and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 108 (Friday, June 5, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30773-30774]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14952]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[CO-070-5101-CO12]


Notice of Availability of the Record of Decision for the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Plateau Creek Pipeline 
Replacement Project

agency: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

action: Notice of Availability of the Record of Decision for the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Plateau Creek Pipeline 
Replacement Project.

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

summary: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Grand Junction Resource Area office, 
Grand Junction District, had an Environmental Impact Statement prepared 
to address impacts of the Plateau Creek Pipeline Replacement project 
proposed by the Ute Water Conservancy District (Ute Water). The project 
is a raw water conveyance system proposed on private and public lands 
in Mesa County, Colorado to replace a deteriorated and under sized 
pipeline currently approved under BLM ROW grant C 081284.
    Copies of the Record of Decision will be available at the Mesa 
County Public

[[Page 30774]]

Library in Grand Junction, Colorado, at the Grand Junction Resource 
Area, 2815 H Road, Grand Junction, Colorado 81506 at the BLM, Colorado 
State Office, 2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215 and at 
the Ute Water Conservancy District, 560 25 Road, Grand Junction, 
Colorado.

dates: The Record of Decision will be available to the public starting 
May 15, 1998. A appeal period of 30 days will begin with the printing 
of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.

for further information contact: BLM, Dave Stevens, Project Team 
Leader, (970) 244-3009.
Mark T. Morse,
District Manager.
[FR Doc. 98-14952 Filed 6-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JB-M