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

[61 NYS3d 482]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael J. Obús, J.), rendered September 6, 2012, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal mischief in the third degree, aggravated cruelty to animals, aggravated harassment in the second degree, and torturing and injuring animals, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 20 to 40 months on the criminal mischief conviction, and one year on each of the remaining convictions, unanimously affirmed.

We reject defendant’s challenges to the sufficiency and weight of the evidence supporting his aggravated cruelty to animals and criminal mischief convictions *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). Initially, we find no basis for disturbing any of the court’s credibility determinations.

The egregious manner in which defendant killed his former domestic partner’s pet parakeet, along with the surrounding circumstances, established that he committed the crime of aggravated cruelty to animals, and specifically, that he intended to cause the bird extreme physical pain (Agriculture and Markets Law § 353-a [1] [i]). Contrary to defendant’s contentions, the evidence does not suggest that the brutal killing of *488the bird at issue caused a death that was so instantaneous that it would not be extremely painful. Defendant argues that this was an “ordinary killing” of an animal that should be punished as a misdemeanor offense of overdriving, torturing, and injuring animals (Agriculture and Markets Law § 353), the crime of which defendant was convicted for killing the victim’s other pet parakeet. However, defendant’s conduct toward the bird at issue was extremely heinous. The court could draw a reasonable inference of extreme physical pain from the fact that the bird had been crushed flat between the bars of its cage. The time it takes to kill an animal is not dispositive under the statute *(see People v Garcia,*29 AD3d 255, 261 [1st Dept 2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 789 [2006]).

Regarding the conviction of criminal mischief in the third degree, the evidence established that defendant caused damage to various items in the victim’s apartment in the amount of $455, which well exceeded the statutory threshold of $250. This was established through the testimony of the victim and that of expert witnesses *(see People v Garcia,*29 AD3d at 263; *People v Daniels,*180 AD2d 567 [1st Dept 1992], *lv denied*80 NY2d 829 [1992]), whose experience and credentials rendered them competent to express opinions about the value of the property defendant destroyed.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Singh and Moulton, JJ.
No. 09-10077.

#### Tommy Jesse Martinez, Petitioner v. California.

562 U.S. 843, 131 S. Ct. 75,

178 L. Ed. 2d 51,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5929.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.

Same case below, 47 Cal. 4th 911, 105 Cal. Rptr. 3d 131, 224 P.3d 877.
#### Medina v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole 112

12/31/2015

609 MAL (2015)

112

. Justice EAKIN did not participate in the decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Cmwlth., 120 A.3d 1116
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 14 (Thursday, January 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3360-3361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1495]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Meeting of the ACRS 
Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a 
meeting on January 30 and 31, 1998, at the Bolger Center, 9600 
Newbridge Drive, Potomac, Maryland.
    The entire meeting will be open to public attendance with the 
exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that 
relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of ACRS, 
and matters the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy.

[[Page 3361]]

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

    Friday, January 30, 1998--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of 
business.
    Saturday, January 31, 1998--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of 
business.
    The Subcommittee will discuss issues associated with the 
prioritization of ACRS activities for FY 1998--FY 2000, ACRS 
operational plan, self-assessment of ACRS performance, potential 
operational areas for improved effectiveness, interaction with ACNW, 
ACRS Fellow's activities, and other activities related to the conduct 
of ACRS business. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, 
analyze relevant issues and facts, and to formulate proposed positions 
and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
    Oral statements may be presented by members of the public with the 
concurrence of the Subcommittee Chairman; written statements will be 
accepted and made available to the Committee. Electronic recordings 
will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are 
open to the public, and questions may be asked only by members of the 
Subcommittee, its consultants, and staff. Persons desiring to make oral 
statements should notify the cognizant ACRS staff engineer named below 
five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate 
arrangements can be made.
    Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been cancelled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling on 
requests for the opportunity to present oral statements, and the time 
allotted therefor can be obtained by contacting the cognizant ACRS 
staff engineer, Dr. John T. Larkins (telephone 301/415-7360) between 
7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (EST). Persons planning to attend this meeting 
are urged to contact the above named individual one or two working days 
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the 
agenda, etc., that may have occurred.

    Dated: January 15, 1998.
Gail H. Marcus,
Acting Chief, Nuclear Reactors Branch.
[FR Doc. 98-1495 Filed 1-21-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
#### Ish Chopra, Appellant, v Pella Window Corporation, Respondent.

[768 NYS2d 680]

*1088Rose, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Hester, Jr., J.), entered November 27, 2002 in Broome County, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Plaintiff commenced this action in February 2002, alleging breach of warranty arising from the sale of windows in 1990. Defendant moved for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the applicable statute of limitations had expired *(see*UCC 2-725). Supreme Court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint.

On appeal, plaintiff asserts that defendant breached a warranty of future performance and, thus, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until he discovered in 2002 that a defect in the windows’ design or manufacture caused them to leak water into his home *(see*UCC 2-725 [2]). The record, however, is devoid of any allegation that defendant warranted that its windows would work for any specified period of time *(see Imperia v Marvin Windows of N.Y.,*297 AD2d 621, 623 [2002]; *St. Patrick’s Home for Aged & Infirm v Laticrete Intl.,*264 AD2d 652, 657 [1999]). Rather, plaintiff concedes that no written warranty was made and, in his complaint, he alleged only that “[d]efendant warranted that said windows would be free of defects, merchantable, and suitable for use in plaintiffs home.” Since the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness do not extend to future performance, they do not invoke the discovery provision of UCC 2-725 (2) *(see Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. v Allied Corp.,*914 F Supp 960, 962 [1995]; *Holdridge v Heyer-Schulte Corp. of Santa Barbara,*440 F Supp 1088, 1104 [1977]).

We also reject plaintiffs contention that defendant should be equitably estopped from asserting a statute of limitations defense *(see Matter of Steyer,*70 NY2d 990, 992-993 [1988]; *Simcuski v Saeli,*44 NY2d 442, 448-449 [1978]). He alleges that he first brought the leakage problem to defendant’s attention in 1992, he continued to complain each year thereafter and yet defendant’s employees misrepresented the cause to be the improper installation of the windows and suggested various ineffectual remedies. However, there is no evidence that defendant prevented plaintiff from making further inquiry and discovering the true cause of the problem before 2002. Nor is there evidence that defendant concealed the windows’ defects or promised to repair them. While plaintiff may not have known what defect caused the leakage when he first complained in 1992, he had timely knowledge sufficient to place him under a duty to make inquiry and ascertain all the relevant facts prior to the expiration of the four-year statute of limitations *(see Davis v Smith Corp.,*262 AD2d 752, 756 [1999]; *Contento v*
      *1089
      *Cortland Mem. Hosp.,*237 AD2d 725, 726 [1997], *lv denied*90 NY2d 802 [1997]). Accordingly, Supreme Court properly dismissed the action as time barred.

Crew III, J.P., Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
No. 10-5199.

#### Jason Futch, Petitioner v. Georgia.

562 U.S. 909, 131 S. Ct. 257,

178 L. Ed. 2d 170,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6951.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia denied.

*171Same case below, 286 Ga. 378, 687 S.E.2d 805.
No. 10-5420.

#### Larry Wayne Wooten, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

562 U.S. 921, 131 S. Ct. 294,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7289.

178 L. Ed. 2d 193,

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 598 F.3d 215.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM TAYLOR
CAPITAL GROUP, INC. FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          74,170
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              56
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,200
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    364,320
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          83,161
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            82,577
<LOANS>                                      1,456,805
<ALLOWANCE>                                     26,261
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,044,370
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,607,550
<SHORT-TERM>                                   147,129
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             27,594
<LONG-TERM>                                    114,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     38,250
<COMMON>                                            47
<OTHER-SE>                                     109,300
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,044,370
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                118,209
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               24,042
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   973
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               143,224
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              49,132
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              64,390
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           78,834
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    6,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 108
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 72,544
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,480
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        (214)
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,293
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.39
<LOANS-NON>                                     10,800
<LOANS-PAST>                                     3,717
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                24,599
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    6,165
<RECOVERIES>                                     1,827
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               26,261
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            26,261
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

IN RE IAN D. SMITH

____________________ 

2012-1344 

(Serial No. 11/890,109) 

______________________

 

 Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

JOHN LOUIS CORDANI, Carmody & Torrance LLP, of 

New Haven, Connecticut, argued for appellant. Of counsel 

was FATIMA LAHNIN. 

MARY L. KELLY, Associate Solicitor, United States 

Patent and Trademark Office, of Alexandria, Virginia, 

argued for Director of the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office. With her on the brief were RAYMOND 

T. CHEN, Solicitor, and FRANCES M. LYNCH, Associate 

Solicitor. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, LOURIE, and SCHALL, Circuit 

Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

November 20, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

 Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Breht T. Feigh,
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, of American Dental Partners, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2007 which this certification accompanies fully complies with
the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2) Information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ BREHT T. FEIGH                                                             
|Breht T. Feigh, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|March 10, 2008
II

Calendar No. 588

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2333

[Report No. 103–346]

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade for the vessel SHAMROCK V.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 28 (legislative day, JULY 20), 1994

Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. KENNEDY) 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, with an amendment

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel

SHAMROCK V.

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 Mer-
2

S 2333 RS

1 chant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), as applica2 ble on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary

3 of Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation

4 with appropriate endorsement for employment in the

5 coastwise trade for the vessel SHAMROCK V (United

6 States official number 900036). 900936).

Calendar No. 588

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2333

[Report No. 103–346]

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to

wise trade for the vessel SHAMROCK V.priate endorsement for employment in the coastissue a certificate of documentation with approAUGUST 19 (legislative day, AUGUST 18), 1994

Reported with an amendment
2017-0847.

#### State v. Montgomery.

Montgomery App. No. 25277, 2013-Ohio-4509. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Kennedy, J., dissents.
Leadership Reflection: Joe Downey
 
  **Portrait of man
        Leadership Spotlight: Joe Downey
            Get to know Joe Downy, the area manager of Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

            SHARE IMAGE:

                Download Image
                    Image Details
                    
                    Photo By: DLA Disposition Services
                    
                    VIRIN: 220517-D-D0441-201** I’ve been married for 39 1⁄2 years, and I like to travel. **Describe your job in a sentence or two.** I manage and advise five personnel on all aspects of property receipt. I work with customers on RIP, MOU’s, scrap and environmental issues. I also track administrative actions for two sites. **What is your area of responsibility?** Tennessee, Kentucky, and part of West Virginia **How long have you worked for the federal government including military service?** 35 years **How long have you worked for DLA Disposition Services?** I’ve worked for DLA Disposition Services for 15 years. **What is your favorite thing about your line of work?** Assisting the warfighter. **What is the best piece of advice someone has given you?** Treat others as you want to be treated. **What is your favorite memory with DLA Disposition Services?** The views of Camp Leatherneck in Afghanistan as I was flying away. **What is one characteristic that you believe every leader should possess?** Adaptability **What is your leadership philosophy and how does that tie into your line of work?** My leadership philosophy is strategic – taking care of customers and employee needs so they succeed in their mission. **How would you describe your leadership style and why has it worked so well for you?** Democratic/Participative – my team has a wealth of knowledge and years, and they know it is valued. **Tell us how you approach change.** Open-mindedness – change happens every day and we must be flexible. **What keeps you motivated?** Knowing we can make a difference when assisting others. **What do you look for when evaluating top talent?** Passion for knowledge and your job as well as doing the right thing. **What are your best practices for achieving goals or accomplishing tasks?** Set phase markings and track your progress. **What do you see as your biggest challenge right now?** Keeping the team focused on task while not knowing the future of our site. **Why is networking to build professional relationships so important in achieving success?** By networking you know who can assist with issues or questions you need advice with. **What mistakes have you seen individuals make that prevent them from being successful?** Not applying themselves. **Name your favorite/recent book(s) you have read?** The Bible **Tell us something that most people might not know about you or your directorate?** I had a farmer’s license when I was 11 years old. **What was your first job?** Farming **What is your best memory of working here?** Listening to the radio while working in the fields. A radio was a big plus back then. **What did you want to be when you grew up?** A Soldier **What are your hobbies?** Travel with my wife and golfing along with some woodworking.
Exhibit 32(b)











CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002








In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Alltel Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Sharilyn S. Gasaway, Executive Vice President - Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge,
that:





(1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934;


and





(2)  The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of


operations
of the Company.








/s/ Sharilyn S. Gasaway


Sharilyn
S. Gasaway


Executive
Vice President - Chief Financial Officer


November
4, 2008



































A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Alltel Corporation and will be retained by Alltel Corporation and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
# DLA Land and Maritime Commander visits command detachments

/ Published Oct. 27, 2021
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime Commander Navy Rear Adm. Kristen Fabry moved strategically to reestablish in-person ties with Land and Maritime detachments at the DLA Maritime Norfolk and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard through on-site visits as travel restrictions eased across the Department of Defense. Fabry completed the two-day swing at the end of September before returning to Columbus, Ohio.

While at DLA Maritime Norfolk Fabry met with Navy Rear Adm. Matt Ott, Fleet Forces Command, N41, DLA Distribution Portsmouth, Virginia and the commanding officer, Norfolk Naval Shipyard to discuss operational priorities.

During her visit Fabry was briefed on current and planned initiatives to further support shipyard operations. Additionally, Fabry conducted a walking question and answer session with associates and sailors, culminating with presentation of several awards.

Fabry conducted a Sailor of the Quarter Award Presentation to Petty Officer 2nd Class Nina Aikins. Aikins was selected DLA NM Sailor of the Quarter, 4th Quarter FY21 for her meticulous work expediting materiel for submarine short-fused availabilities while at Norfolk Naval Base. She also recognized Joe Mariano for his selection as Associate of the Quarter. Mariano’s achievements were critical in ensuring DLA NM budget submission data was accurate and management of Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request documents across supplies and services that support DLA NM operations at NNSY.

She also engaged in discussions addressing ongoing support from DLA for the NNSY mission. Key in those discussions was committing to improvements in the DLA/NNSY partnership and visioning how it will look in the coming years. 

While at DLA Distribution in Portsmouth, Virginia, Fabry received a briefing from the DDPV team. The briefing covered the many functions and capabilities of DDPV and how they support the shipyard. Following the brief, the group conducted a walking tour of DDPV spaces, including the receiving floor, storage and shipping. 

After the tour, Fabry made coin presentations to DDPV associates Stephanie Murphy and Brittany Richardson for their hard work receiving and issuing material quickly to maintainers performing critical work on national defense assets.