alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Alexander Ashkenazi, Appellant, v AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company, Respondent.

[63 NYS3d 853]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered on or about October 11, 2016, which, among other things, granted defendant insurer’s renewed motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s complaint, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for rescission of insurance policies issued to the insured, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing defendant’s counterclaim for fraud, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on its rescission counterclaim, given the material misrepresentations contained in the insured’s insurance applications *(Geer v Union Mut. Life Ins. Co.,*273 NY 261, 265, 266 [1937]). There is no dispute that the applicants grossly overstated the insured’s financial circumstances. Fur*584ther, defendant has provided ample evidence of its underwriting manual and practices indicating that but for the misrepresentations contained in the application, it would not have issued the policies *(see e.g. Feldman v*Friedman, 241 AD2d 433, 434 [1st Dept 1997]).

The motion court correctly denied plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment dismissing defendant’s fraud counterclaim. Issues of fact exist concerning whether the applicants, including plaintiff and the insured, intended to commit fraud when they applied for the policies *(Matter of Setters v AI Props. & Devs. [USA] Corp.,*139 AD3d 492, 493 [1st Dept 2016]). The potential return of the premiums plaintiff paid rests on a resolution of the fraud claim, since defendant may be entitled to offset the return of premiums against the damages it incurred from the alleged fraud *(see e.g. Mincho v Bankers’ Life Ins.*Co., 129 App Div 332, 334 [1st Dept 1908]).

Concur—Renwick, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Mazzarelli, Kahn and Moulton, JJ.
No. 09-11501.

#### Albert Legette, III, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1061, 131 S. Ct. 638,

178 L. Ed. 2d 478,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9257.

November 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 371 Fed. Appx. 30.
# C_2015096EN.01001801.xml

| 23.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 96/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2015 — IOIP Holdings v OHIM (GLISTEN)

(Case T-648/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark GLISTEN - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 096/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: IOIP Holdings LLC (Fort Wayne, United States) (represented by: H. Dhondt and S. Kinart, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 September 2013 (Case R 1028/2013-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign GLISTEN as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders IOIP Holdings LLC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders IOIP Holdings LLC to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 61, 1.3.2014.

1

---
No. 10-6524.

#### Dimitra A. Gibson, Petitioner v. Grant Culliver, Warden, et al.

562 U.S. 1033, 131 S. Ct. 575,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8767.

178 L. Ed. 2d 420,

November 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
No. 10-5739.

#### Edwin F. Alvanez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 936, 131 S. Ct. 340,

178 L. Ed. 2d 222,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7372.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 375 Fed. Appx. 336.
#### In the Matter of Carlos Alberto Estrada, Respondent, v Olinda Mirella Palacios, Appellant.

[50 NYS3d 292]

Appeal by the mother from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Christopher Pizzolo, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated October 30, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a fact-finding hearing, awarded the mother and father joint legal custody of their children with residential custody to the father.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The father and the mother, who were never married, have two children together. The father filed a petition for custody of both children, and, following a hearing, the Family Court awarded the mother and the father joint legal custody, with residential custody to the father and visitation to the mother. The mother appeals.

“ ‘The court’s paramount concern in any custody dispute is to determine, under the totality of the circumstances, what is in the best interests of the child’ ” *(Matter of Gooler v Gooler,*107 AD3d 712, 712 [2013], *quoting Matter of Julie v Wills,*73 AD3d 777, 777 [2010]; *see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]). In determining an initial petition for child custody, the court must consider, among other things, “(1) which alternative will best promote stability; (2) the available home environments; (3) the past performance of each parent; (4) each parent’s relative fitness, including his or her ability to guide the child, provide for the child’s overall well being, and foster the child’s relationship with the noncustodial parent; and (5) the child’s desires” *(Matter of Supangkat v Torres,*101 AD3d 889, 890 [2012]). Custody determinations depend to a great extent upon an assessment of the character and credibility of the parties and witnesses, and therefore, deference is accorded to the trial court’s findings in this regard *(see Matter of Gooler v Gooler,*107 AD3d at 712). Such findings will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record *(see id.; see also Matter of Frankiv v Kalitka,*105 AD3d 1045, 1046 [2013]).

Here, the Family Court properly weighed all of the factors in awarding the mother and father joint legal custody and awarding residential custody to the father. The court did not, as the mother alleges, give undue weight to the opinion of the court-appointed forensic psychologist *(cf. Matter of Psaros v Mitchell-*
      *805
      *Ortega,*128 AD3d 703, 704 [2015]). The court, after evaluating the testimony and considering the recommendations of the forensic expert, determined that the children’s best interests would be served by awarding the mother and father joint legal custody and awarding the father residential custody (see *Matter of Andrews v Mouzon,*80 AD3d 761, 763 [2011]). That determination is supported by the record, and we decline to disturb it (see *id.*at 763; *Matter of Guzman v Pizarro,*102 AD3d 964, 965 [2013]).

The mother’s remaining contentions either are without merit or do not require reversal.

Mastro, J.P., Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.
No. 10-451.

#### Robert M. Ross, Petitioner v. Orange County Bar Association, et al.

562 U.S. 1108, 131 S. Ct. 823,

178 L. Ed. 2d 556,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9634.

December 13, 2010.

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

Same case below, 369 Fed. Appx. 868.
# C_2015034EN.01003501.xml

| 2.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 34/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 34/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2014 — DTL Corporación v OHIM — Vallejo Rosell (Generia)

(Case T-176/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Generia - Earlier Community figurative mark Generalia generación renovable - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 63(2) and Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 034/40)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: DTL Corporación (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: A. Zuazo Araluze, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Mar Vallejo Rosell (Pinto, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 January 2013 (Case R 661/2012-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ms Mar Vallejo Rosell and DTL Corporación, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | DTL Corporación, SL is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

DTL Corporación, SL is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.

1

---
# C_2014388EN.01001501.xml

| 3.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 388/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 388/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2014 — El Corte Inglés, SA v OHIM — Gaffashion (BAUSS)

(Case T-267/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark BAUSS - Earlier Community figurative mark BASS3TRES - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No likelihood of confusion))

2014/C 388/18

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Seijo Veiguela and J. L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. García Murillo and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Gaffashion — Comércio de Accessórios de Moda, Lda (Viana do Castelo, Portugal)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

da

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 February 2013 (Case R 2295/2011-2), concerning opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés, SA and Gaffashion — Comércio de Accessórios de Moda, Lda.

da

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders El Corte Inglés, SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders El Corte Inglés, SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 215, 27.7.2013.

1

---
No. 10-7065.

#### Ronald Andrew Romero, Petitioner v. Wyoming.

562 U.S. 1073, 131 S. Ct. 670,

178 L. Ed. 2d 499,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9322.

November 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 233 P.3d 951.
No. 10-6127.

#### Ketan Patel, Petitioner v. Testpak, Inc.

562 U.S. 1010, 131 S. Ct. 520,

178 L. Ed. 2d 382,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8570.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, denied.
# EMS Week spotlight: Robert Dyer

/ Published May 24, 2023
SUSQUEHANNA, Pennsylvania, 
*Editor’s Note: May 21-27 is National Emergency Medical Technician Week. This year’s theme is “Where Emergency Care Begins.” This is a part of a series of spotlights highlighting firefighter/paramedics who serve as DLA’s first responders in emergencies.*

**Your name:** Robert Dyer

**Job title and duty location:** Paramedic/firefighter/hazardous materials technician for DLA Installation Management Susquehanna, Pennsylvania

**What inspired you to become a firefighter/EMT/paramedic?** I started when my Marine Corps unit was deployed to a wildland fire incident in Salmon Creek, Idaho. After two more months working with multiple wildland fire agencies, I made the decision to pursue this line of work after the Marine Corps.

**What did you do before you got to DLA and when did you join DLA Fire and Emergency Services?**After finishing my enlistment with the Marine Corps, I began my firefighter and emergency medical technician training and volunteered at the local fire and ambulance departments to build my experience. I started my federal firefighter career at the Coatesville Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Coatesville, Pennsylvania, in 2007. I transferred to DLA in January 2016 after nine years at the VA center.

**Describe your typical shift in 2-3 sentences.**My shift typically starts by discussing happenings during previous shifts with those going off duty. After that, I check my equipment. Throughout the day I work alongside the other personnel on duty while performing station maintenance, responding to calls and training at the gym.  

**Is there a moment you’ve encountered on duty that stands out?**There are multiple significant calls where we have made a difference for the citizens we serve. We had patients who were in cardiac arrest who continue to live normal lives because of our actions, and we had many moments in the firehouse that stand out as well. However, the moments that stand out most are when all our families come into the firehouse during holidays and family days.

**What’s the hardest part of your job and why?**The time away from home is probably the most difficult part of our career. We work long hours and often miss out on special moments such as our kids’ sporting events, holidays and moments that happen at home while we are working.

**What do you like most about your job and why?**I enjoy working with my coworkers. They are my extended family. While on duty, we work together as a team to overcome obstacles and help people when they need it most. I love what I do and believe that I have the best job in the world.

**How do you unwind after a shift?** I spend time with my family, play ice hockey and golf.
# DLA Columbus recertified as “Star” worksite in Voluntary Protection Program 

/ Published Feb. 25, 2016
COLUMBUS, Ohio, After an extensive evaluation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) over the past year Defense Logistics Agency Columbus recertified its “Star” status in the Voluntary Protection Program (VPP). VPP is OSHA’s most rigorous evaluation program for safety and health conditions at both private and federal work sites throughout the United States. Within the VPP program, the Star ranking represents the highest rating score. In 2007, DLA Columbus was the first activity in all of DLA and ninth in the entire Department of Defense to receive this recognition.In a crowded auditorium at DLA Land and Maritime’s headquarters at the Defense Supply Center Columbus, DLA associates gathered to celebrate its status as one of the safest worksites in the country. DLA Land and Maritime Commander Navy Rear Adm. John King told Columbus associates that, “the most important commodity we have as an organization is our people. We’ll continue to create an environment on the installation that takes a proactive approach to the overall wellness and safety of our people.”Installation Safety and Health Specialist Amy Manbeck and Chief of Safety and Health Division Leslie Fox both received special recognition from King for their personal contributions to earning the Star designation.“We truly wouldn’t have been able to accomplish this without everyone’s team effort in joining us and following us down this path,” said Fox.Despite receiving the recognition after more than a year’s preparation, Manbeck was quick to remind the audience not to rest on their laurels adding, “Our next recertification is in 2020!”David Wilson, assistant area director of OSHA's Columbus Office presented King with the VPP Star flag commemorating the center’s recertification status.While presenting the flag, Wilson said, “I can’t think of a site that deserves this more than you do.”This award marks the third time DLA Columbus has won Star status in less than 10 years. Once a site achieves the Star designation, it is reevaluated every three to five years. In Ohio, less than 100 sites earned a Star designation during this rating period.King invited safety officials onstage to accept and unfurl the new Star flag. He told the audience, “This VPP honor belongs to all DLA Columbus associates who’ve made safety an important part of their lives. Today you are without a doubt the “Stars” of this celebration.”
Exhibit
23.1







Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
  The Board
of Directors and Stockholders
 Duckwall-ALCO
Stores, Inc.:
  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-139678) on Form S-8 of Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. of our reports dated April
28, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Duckwall-ALCO
Stores, Inc. and subsidiaries as of February 3, 2008 and January 28, 2007, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended February 3,
2008, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
February 3, 2008, which reports appear in this annual report on Form 10-K of
Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. for the fiscal year ended February 3,
2008.
  The audit
report on the consolidated financial statements of Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc.
and subsidiaries referred to above contains an explanatory paragraph stating
that, as discussed in Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements, effective
January 29, 2007, the Company adopted FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes.  As discussed in Notes 1 and 14 to the consolidated
financial statements, effective January 30, 2006, the Company adopted the fair
value method of accounting for share-based compensation as required by Statement
of Financial Accounting Standard No. 123(R),Share-Based Payment and
adopted Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior
Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial
Statements.
  Our
report dated April 28, 2008, on the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting as of February 3, 2008, expresses our opinion that
Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. did not maintain effective internal control over
financial reporting as of February 3, 2008 because of the effect of a material
weakness on the achievement of the objectives of the control criteria and
contains an explanatory paragraph that states a material weakness has been
identified and included in management’s assessment related to the lack of
adequate transition planning for turnover in finance and accounting personnel,
which resulted in ineffective operation of year-end closing process
controls.
   
   Kansas
City, Missouri
 April 28,
2008
# C_2016222EN.01004702.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/47

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 4 May 2016 — Corman v Commission

(Case F-92/13) (1)

(2016/C 222/67)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 336, 16/11/2013, p. 32.

---
No. 10-6318.

#### Robert Leon Strickland, Jr., Petitioner v. J. Frank Baker, et al.

562 U.S. 1042, 131 S. Ct. 626,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8953.

178 L. Ed. 2d 433,

November 15, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 6, 2010, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
No. 09-11419.

#### In re Allen Glenn Thomas, Petitioner.

562 U.S. 1105, 131 S. Ct. 847,

178 L. Ed. 2d 553,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9816.

December 13, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
#### Michael A. Serao, Appellant, v Jonathan Bench-Serao, Respondent.

[53 NYS3d 628]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lori S. Sattler, J.), entered on or about July 28, 2016, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant’s motion to vacate the divorce judgment solely to the extent necessary to resolve issues of equitable distribution, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to dismiss defendant’s forgery claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*646Defendant established prima facie that the judgment of divorce must be vacated because it is devoid of any provision addressing the equitable distribution of the parties’ marital assets or debts (see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [5] [a]; *Wong v Wong,*300 AD2d 473 [2d Dept 2002]). In opposition, plaintiff argued that the parties had voluntarily agreed to distribute all assets and debts, but he failed to present a written agreement to opt out of the equitable distribution provisions sufficient to satisfy the formal requirements of Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (3) *(see*Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [5] [a]; *see also*CPLR 2104; General Obligations Law § 5-703). Accordingly, the judgment was correctly vacated to the extent necessary to determine equitable distribution *(see Conti v Conti,*199 AD2d 985 [4th Dept 1993]).

Plaintiff’s cross motion to dismiss defendant’s forgery claims was correctly denied under CPLR 3211 (a) (7) or CPLR 3211 (a) (1). Defendant alleges that plaintiff fraudulently forged his name on two loan documents, without his knowledge or consent, and that he only learned of the loans nearly two years later, when he was contacted by debt collectors. These allegations are sufficiently specific to state a claim *(see Matter of Kennelly v Mobius Realty Holdings LLC,*33 AD3d 380, 382 [1st Dept 2006]). Plaintiff’s motion relied on affidavits disputing defendant’s allegations. However, factual affidavits do not constitute documentary evidence within the meaning of the statute *(Art & Fashion Group Corp. v Cyclops Prod., Inc.,*120 AD3d 436, 438 [1st Dept 2014]).

Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Manzanet-Daniels and Webber, JJ.