alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Craig Newkirk, Appellant.

[60 NYS3d 829]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen Biben, J.), rendered on or about March 1, 2016, 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— Acosta, P.J., Renwick, Webber, Oing and Moulton, JJ.
# Caring, trustworthy leader receives recognition

/ Published May 19, 2021
RICHMOND, Va., 
Damon Heemstra, the chief, of the Planning and Support Division in the Customer Operations Directorate at Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Jacksonville, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida, was awarded the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation Leadership Award for the month of March 2021.

This award recognizes DLA Aviation leaders that exemplify the four leadership traits deemed by the agency as the characteristics needed to be a good leader. These traits are referred to as the four dimensions of transformative leadership: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration.   

According to David Scalf, the directorate’s deputy, Damon is an ideal candidate for this award because he cares; he cares about the retail mission; he cares about his team; and he is also loyal and trustworthy. 

“Above all, Damon knows his job well and the teams he leads respond well to his challenges for quality work, all the time and every time,” Scalf said.

 “I am honored and humbled to have received this award,” Heemstra said.

According to the award nomination, Heemstra demonstrated the four dimensions of transformative leadership through his collaboration and alignment toward mission and business centric goals that helped improve aircraft material availability as well as component and engine support for the warfighter. 

Heemstra created a purpose-driven team focused on "inventory optimization" to use excess and dormant retail stock to fill DLA enterprise unfilled orders, while at the same time reducing DLA’s distribution storage footprint.

It was this initiative, now shared with all of the DLA Aviation Navy industrial site activities, which resulted in a validation of 26,453 national item identification numbers. The net result, 307 unique NIINs, valued at $2.4 million set aside to fill DLA enterprise UFOs furthering warfighter readiness.

By challenging his team, they were able to reach and maintain the highest MA rates ever recorded at any industrial site activity.  This resulted in a 12-month MA average of 94.6%, peaking three months above 97%.

“It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to supervise such a professional and dedicated workforce here at DLA Aviation Jacksonville,” Heemstra said. “I am glad to be a member of the team.
# Lives saved with excess equipment in Keystone State

/ Published Sept. 27, 2019
NEW CASTLE, Penn., 
Excess lifesaving equipment and supplies routinely get released to first responders across the U.S. through DLA Disposition Services sites via the agency’s Law Enforcement Support Office.

Pennsylvania’s New Castle Police Department serves the Lawrence County community, about halfway between Pittsburgh and Lake Erie. Department officials recently shared some feedback on how access to military property helps their officers protect the lives of local citizens.

In June, New Castle Police Officer Steven Brooks said he received a call to assist neighboring Shenango Township on an “active shooter/person shot.”

“When I arrived, other officers requested a medical kit,” Brooks said. “I brought the kit I received from [New Castle PD] Lt. Kevin Seelbaugh. The H&H [Compressed] Gauze and the pressure bandage were used on a male who had two gunshot wounds to the abdomen. The first responding officer from Shenango Township Police Department was Officer [Vince] Buonpane, who served in the Marine Corps and was familiar with the medical kit. He applied the bandages and controlled the bleeding until EMS arrived.”     

In an April incident, a motorcyclist and his passenger were traveling behind an SUV and struck the vehicle as it stopped to make a left turn. The force of the impact effectively amputated the rider’s leg and left both with severe injuries. Witnesses attempted first aid but failed to control the bleeding while using a jacket and belt. According to Seelbaugh, the first New Castle police officer to reach the scene, an Army veteran named Sgt. David Viggiano, evaluated the situation and stopped the bleeding with an excess combat tourniquet obtained through DLA’s Law Enforcement Support Office. Seelbaugh said the motorcyclist survived and credited his life to Viggiano’s assistance.

“Had we not obtained that tourniquet from DLA Susquehanna, that young man would probably have died from blood loss,” Seelbaugh said. “He lost his leg, but was grateful to be alive. The young man is already back to work with a local paving company.”

Seelbaugh said that since those incidents occurred, his department has used excess military first aid equipment in two additional shootings to stop bleeding until ambulance crews arrived. He expressed thanks to the DLA workforce for its support.   

“All of that came from your site and the victims all survived,” he said. “Those of us on the receiving end of the work you all do - and those who have no idea what you do – are grateful for all of your hard work and dedication.”
Northgate Minerals Corporation: Exhibit 4.1 - Prepared by TNT Filings
Inc.



 



 

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


The Board of Directors 

Northgate Minerals Corporation 

 

We consent to the use of our 

(a)    
Auditors' report dated February 17, 2006; and 

(b)    Comments by
Auditors for U.S Readers on Canada - U.S. Reporting Differences dated February
17, 2006, 

on the consolidated balance sheets of Northgate Minerals Corporation as at
December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the consolidated statements of operations,
retained earnings (deficit) and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2005, incorporated by reference herein. 

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chartered Accountants 

Vancouver, Canada 

June 1, 2006 




 

Northgate Minerals Corporation 

Toronto, Ontario 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen: 


Re: Registration Statement on Form F-8 


With respect to the subject registration statement, we acknowledge our
awareness of the incorporation by reference therein of our compilation report
relating to the pro forma balance sheet of Northgate Minerals Corporation as at
March 31, 2006 and the pro forma statement of operations for the three months
then ended and the year ended December 31, 2005, and our comments for United
States readers on differences between Canadian and United States reporting
standards, both dated May 26, 2006. 

We are not subject to the liability provisions of Section 11 of the
Securities Act of 1933 for the compilation report and comments because they are
not considered a "report" or a "part" of a registration statement prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


Very truly yours, 

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chartered Accountants 

Vancouver, Canada 

June 1, 2006
AAM

- 1 3

- 338

- E May 07, 2013

Exemption No. 10354 A

Reg ulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2011

- 0 938

Mr. Kurt Gross

Wings Air Charter, LLC

236 Airport Hangar Drive

Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494

Dear Mr

. G ross :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption

No. 10354. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions

and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By submission receive d April 4, 2013 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) on behalf of Wings Air Charter, LLC (WAC ) for an exemption from part 120 of Title

14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), to allow WAC

, which is operat ing under separate

parts of 1 4 CFR, to cover its safety

- se nsiti ve employee under one testing program.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exempt ion.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any

delay in acting on this pe tit ion would be detrimental to WAC

.

Our D ecision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10354

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA A dministrator has

delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the following conditions and limitations.2

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of WAC are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times

while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implement ed under the auspices of

the WAC part 135 operation, not under part 91.

Thi s exemption terminates on September 30

, 201 5 unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

James R. Fraser, M.D.

Deputy General Air Surgeon
May 19, 2014

CAAP-12-0000715

#### Kapika v. State

Affirmed
From:    Mohan Nagavedu [mnagavedu@aqmd.gov]

Sent:    Friday, March 18, 2011 4:31 PM

To:    Adams, Lucy H.

Cc:    Mulrine.Phil@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Chrome Source Test Reports ‐ 2 of 3

Attachments: Decore Plating_2001.pdf; Domar Precision_1995.pdf; EME Inc_2000.pdf;  

Hightower Plating_1997.pdf; Markland Manufacturing Inc_2005.pdf;  

Maxima_2007 and 2008.pdf; Microplate_1999.pdf; Moog_2002.pdf; Product  

Engineering_1999.pdf; Sigma Plating_2002.pdf

Hi Lucy / Phil

              Please see attached the scanned summaries and evaluation reports from the list you provided.   

Due to the size I am sending in separate e‐mails .  Also, we are working on compiling more current

reports for source tests at the same facilities.  

Thanks,

Complied by Eric Padilla

===========================================

P. Eric Padilla

Air Quality Engineer

SCAQMD, Source Test Engineering

21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765

(909)396‐2265

(909)396‐2099  Fax

epadilla@aqmd.gov

===========================================
#### Laura Gomez, Appellant, v New York City Transit Authority et al., Respondents.

[59 NYS3d 437]

*502In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated March 31, 2015, as granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the cross motion is denied.

On October 21, 2008, the plaintiff, while operating a motor vehicle on 108th Street near the entrance to Horace Harding Expressway in Queens, was involved in a collision with a vehicle operated by the defendant Adam Rhodie in his capacity as an employee of the defendant All Transit, LLC, and owned by the defendant New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter collectively the defendants). One year later, the plaintiff commenced this action against the defendants alleging, inter alia, that as a result of this accident, she sustained injuries to the cervical and lumbar regions of her spine. After discovery, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability and the defendants cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury. In the order appealed from, the Supreme Court, granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability and granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury. The plaintiff appeals from so much of the order as granted the defendants’ cross motion.

The defendants met their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The defendants submitted competent medical evidence establishing, prima facie, that the alleged injury to the lumbar region of the plaintiff’s spine was not caused by the accident at issue *(see generally Jilani v Palmer,*83 AD3d 786, 787 [2011]).

In opposition to the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment, however, the plaintiff submitted evidence raising a triable issue of fact as to whether the alleged injury to the' lumbar region of her spine was caused by the accident at issue (see *Perl v Meher,*18 NY3d 208, 218-219 [2011]; *Sforza v Big Guy Leasing Corp.,*51 AD3d 659, 661 [2008]).

*503Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Dillon, J.P., Austin, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
# Land and Maritime electronics engineer Taysa Markus featured in latest DLA Rap episode

/ Published May 25, 2021
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Meet Taysa Markus, a shining star at DLA Land and Maritime, in the latest episode of the DLA Rap produced by DLA Headquarters. Markus defines resiliency. At the end of the Vietnam War, her family took on hardship, adversity and trauma and persevered. Today Markus is an electronics engineer with Land and Maritime’s Engineering and Technical Support Directorate. In the video, which premiered May 12, Markus describes the events that ultimately brought her to Columbus, Ohio, and how they impacted her.

Markus’ journey to the Central Ohio logistics hub began in her hometown of Hue, Vietnam, where her father worked as a naval officer in the South Vietnamese army and her mother was a homemaker.

Following the end of the Vietnam War, Markus’ father was put into a labor camp by the Vietnamese government and remained there for 12 years. Her mother entered trade and traveled to support the family during those long years. A change that proved pivotal for the family came in 1991 when they were admitted into the United States through the Humanitarian Resettlement Program.

“My first impression of the U.S. was, we made it to the great country, giving us hope for a better future,” Markus said.

Click here to watch the full video and hear more about Markus’ journey
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John R. Hess, Appellant.

[52 NYS3d 686]

Devine, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), rendered May 18, 2015, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Defendant pleaded guilty to a superior court information charging him with driving while intoxicated and waived his right to appeal. He was sentenced, in accordance with the plea agreement, to five years of probation. Defendant appeals.

We are unpersuaded by defendant’s contention that the waiver of the right to appeal is invalid. The record reflects that County Court adequately explained that the waiver of the right to appeal was separate and distinct from the rights forfeited by the guilty plea and defendant acknowledged that he understood the nature of the appeal waiver. In addition, defendant executed a detailed written waiver in open court after discussing its consequences with defense counsel. In view of the foregoing, defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence *(see People v Morgan,*142 AD3d 1253, 1253 [2016]; *People v Simon,*140 AD3d 1533, 1534 [2016]). As such, the valid appeal waiver precludes defendant’s challenge to the severity of the sentence *(see People v White,*145 AD3d 1324, 1325 [2016]).

McCarthy, J.R, Egan Jr., Lynch and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
#### Archstone Development LLC, Appellant, v Renval Construction LLC et al., Respondents.

[67 NYS3d 7]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered February 10, 2017, which granted defendants’ CPLR 3211 motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly dismissed the causes of action for fraudulent inducement as duplicative of the breach of contract claim *(see generally Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R.R. Co.,*70 NY2d 382, 389 [1987]). Plaintiff’s allegation that defendants misrepresented their intent to use a deposit to engage subcontractors amounts to allegations of an insincere promise of future performance under the contract, which is insufficient to plead fraud *(see Cronos Group Ltd. v XComIP, LLC,*156 AD3d 54 [1st Dept 2017]; *Castellotti v Free,*138 AD3d 198, 211 [1st Dept 2016]). The claim based on allegations of post-contract misrepresentations is similarly duplicative of the breach of contract claim *(Clark-Fitzpatrick,*70 NY2d at 389).

*433The motion court correctly dismissed the breach of contract claim on the ground that plaintiff failed to satisfy a condition precedent required for bringing suit. Although plaintiff timely filed a notice of claim with the initial decision maker under section 15.1.2 of the AIA A201-2007 form agreement (construction agreement), it did not pursue mediation as required by section 15.3.1 *(see MCC Dev. Corp. v Perla,*81 AD3d 474, 475 [1st Dept 2011], *lv denied*17 NY3d 715 [2011]). Plaintiffs contention that it was not required to comply with the condition precedent because the agreement giving rise to the deposit was separate and distinct from the construction agreement is unavailing. As the construction agreement governs costs and payment for work performed, which included the 10% deposit, the negotiations and agreement giving rise to the deposit have been superseded by the construction agreement pursuant to the latter agreement’s merger clause *(see Matter of Primex Intl. Corp. v Wal-Mart Stores,*89 NY2d 594, 599-600 [1997]; *Garthon Bus. Inc. v Kirill Ace Stein,*138 AD3d 587, 591-592 [1st Dept 2016], *appeal dismissed*27 NY3d 1182 [2016]).

The motion court correctly rejected plaintiff’s claim of a mutual termination, in light of emails clearly showing a unilateral termination.

Although the motion court erroneously relied on an inapplicable contract provision in dismissing the breach of fiduciary duty claim, the claim should still be dismissed as duplicative of the breach of contract claim *(Clark-Fitzpatrick,*70 NY2d at 389; *Chowaiki & Co. Fine Art Ltd. v Lacker,*115 AD3d 600, 600 [1st Dept 2014]).

Concur—Richter, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Andrias, Kern and Singh, JJ.
No. 11-10990.

#### Curry *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### People v Rivera

4th Dept: 144 AD3d 1595

denied
#### Victor Manuel Santiago, Respondent, v Pioneer Transportation Corp. et al., Appellants.

[66 NYS3d 133]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Wilma Guzman, J.), entered March 4, 2016, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to liability, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

On January 21, 2014, a school bus owned and operated by defendants collided with the rear of a truck plaintiff claimed, by affidavit, that he was driving. In contrast, the defendant bus driver averred that plaintiff was not the truck driver based on his observance of that driver’s appearance, which contrasted with photographs of plaintiff, which defendant viewed. Thus, the court erred in granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment because, “viewed ‘in the light most favorable to the non-moving party,’ ” defendants raised an issue of fact as to the identity of the other driver *(Vega v Restani Constr. Corp.,*18 *452NY3d 499, 503 [2012]). “[W]hether a particular defendant owes a duty to a particular plaintiff is a question of fact” for the jury *(Kimmell v Schaefer,*89 NY2d 257, 263 [1996]). The bus driver’s affidavit was not impermissibly self-serving as having contradicted any of his prior testimony *(cf. Caraballo v Kingsbridge Apt. Corp.,*59 AD3d 270 [1st Dept 2009]). It is for the jury to resolve issues of credibility as between the conflicting affidavits of the parties concerning the identity of the truck driver *(see Ocean v Hossain,*127 AD3d 402, 403 [1st Dept 2015]; *Agli v Turner Constr. Co.,*237 AD2d 173, 174 [1st Dept 1997]).

Concur—Renwick, J.R, Manzanet-Daniels, Gische, Kahn and Singh, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 30019]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14576]



[[Page 30019]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Notice of Intent to Repatriate a Cultural Item from New Mexico in 
the Possession of the Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice is hereby given under the Native American Graves Protection 
and Repatriation Act, 43 CFR 10.10 (a)(3), of the intent to repatriate 
a cultural item from New Mexico in the possession of the Museum of 
Northern Arizona which meets the definition of ``sacred object'' under 
Section 2 of the Act.
    The cultural item is a Navajo Male and Female Shooting Way Chant 
bundle.
    In 1968, this bundle was donated to the Museum of Northern Arizona 
by an individual whose name is withheld at the Museum of Northern 
Arizona's request. According to museum documentation, this individual 
had acquired this bundle sometime earlier from a ``chanter from 
Clearwater'' (near Farmington, NM).
    Museum documentation and consultation with representatives of the 
Navajo Nation clearly establish that this bundle is a product of Navajo 
culture. Representatives of the Navajo Nation have also indicated that 
this bundle is needed by traditional religious leaders for the practice 
of traditional Native American religion by their present-day adherents.
    Based on the above-mentioned information, officials of the Museum 
of Northern Arizona have determined that, pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 
(d)(3), this cultural item is a specific ceremonial object needed by 
traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of 
traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.  
Officials of the Museum of Northern Arizona have also determined that, 
pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (e), there is a relationship of shared group 
identity which can be reasonably traced between this item and the 
Navajo Nation.
    This notice has been sent to officials of the Navajo Nation. 
Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be 
culturally affiliated with these objects should contact David R. 
Wilcox, NAGPRA Coordinator, Museum of Northern Arizona, 3101 North Fort 
Valley Rd., Flagstaff, AZ 86001; telephone (520) 774-5211, ext. 244 
before July 2, 1998. Repatriation of this object to the Navajo Nation 
may begin after that date if no additional claimants come forward.
Dated: May 27, 1998.
Francis P. McManamon,
Departmental Consulting Archeologist,
Archeology and Ethnography.
[FR Doc. 98-14576 Filed 6-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-F