alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: October 27, 2016 521958 

________________________________

In the Matter of ARIEZ T.,

Alleged to be a Neglected

Child.

SCHENECTADY COUNTY DEPARTMENT

OF SOCIAL SERVICES, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Respondent;

JOHN T.,

Appellant.

________________________________

Calendar Date: September 6, 2016

Before: Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Lynch, Rose and Clark, JJ.

__________

Sandra M. Colatosti, Albany, for appellant.

Kevin M. Litz, Schenectady County Department of Social

Services, Schenectady, for respondent.

Alexandra G. Verrigni, Rexford, attorney for the child.

__________

Lynch, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Schenectady

County (Powers, J.), entered June 30, 2015, which, in a

proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 10, denied

respondent's motion to dismiss the petition.

Respondent is the father of a child born in December 2014. 

Family Court removed the child from his mother's care immediately

after his birth. In April 2015, petitioner commenced this

proceeding to adjudicate the child to be neglected based, in
-2- 521958 

part, on respondent's long history of substance abuse coupled

with his admission that one month earlier, he had been admitted

to the hospital after he consumed "70 beers and snorted an eight

ball of cocaine." Respondent moved to dismiss the neglect

petition, arguing that, without an allegation that the conduct

occurred in the child's presence, there was no basis for Family

Court to find that he had neglected the child. In June 2015,

Family Court denied the motion, finding that petitioner

established a prima facie case for neglect and permitted the

proceeding to continue. Respondent now appeals. 

The attorney for the child advises that, during the

pendency of this appeal, petitioner filed a permanent neglect

petition pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, and Family

Court determined that the child was abandoned (see Social

Services Law § 384-b [5]). On April 26, 2016, the court

terminated respondent's parental rights to the child. Under

these circumstances, we agree with the attorney for the child

that respondent's appeal has been rendered moot (see Matter of

Mary YY. [Albert YY.], 98 AD3d 1198, 1198 [2012]; Matter of Riley

SS. [Richard SS.], 90 AD3d 1179, 1179 [2011]). Although there is

an exception to the mootness doctrine where a finding of neglect

creates a stigma that affects future proceedings (see Matter of

Bayley W. [Jaden W.], 100 AD3d 1203, 1203-1204 [2012]), here,

because there was no such factual finding, the exception does not

apply (see Matter of Maddock E. [Luis E.], 138 AD3d 559, 559-560

[2016]). 

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Rose and Clark, JJ., concur.
-3- 521958 

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without

costs. 

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
_____________

No. 96-3313SI

_____________

In re: Terry M. Svejda *

*

____________________ *

*

Terry M. Svejda, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Southern

 Appellant, * District of Iowa.

*

v. * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Farmers’ Cooperative Business *

Association, Shelby, Nebraska, *

*

 Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: March 10, 1997

 Filed: March 17, 1997

_____________

Before FAGG, HEANEY, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Terry M. Svejda appeals the district court’s grant of summary

judgment to Farmers’ Cooperative Business Association. Having reviewed the

record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that an extensive discussion

is not warranted. We believe the district court’s decision was correct,

and we affirm on the basis of the district court’s opinion. See 8th Cir.

R. 47B.

A true copy.

 Attest:

 CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
DAVFAM, LLC v. Arthur E. DAVIS, III

No. 327P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2019

Arthur E. Davis, III, For Davis, Arthur E. (III)

Satie Munn, Attorney at Law, Trey Lindley, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For DavFam, LLC

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th of September 2018 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2019."

Davis, J. recused
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

     We  have  issued  our  report  dated  August  23,  2007,  accompanying  the
consolidated  financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of
Vasomedical,  Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May
31, 2007. We hereby consent to the  incorporation by reference of said report in
the Registration  Statements of Vasomedical,  Inc. and Subsidiaries on Forms S-8
(File No.  333-86152,  effective April 12, 2002, File No.  333-42692,  effective
August  1,  2000,  File No.  333-85457,  effective  August  18,  1999,  File No.
333-85455,  effective August 18, 1999, File No.  333-60471,  effective August 3,
1998).


/s/ Miller Ellin & Company, LLP
MILLER ELLIN & COMPANY, LLP

New York, New York
August 23, 2007
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Jeffrey A. Wahba,certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed thisQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of HireRight, Inc.;

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, thisQuarterly Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this Quarterly Report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this Report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this Quarterly Report;

 

4.             The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)), for the registrant and we have:

 

(a)           designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisQuarterly Report is being prepared;

 

(b)           evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisQuarterly Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

 

(c)           disclosed in this QuarterlyReport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

(a)           all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)           any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: May 7, 2008 | By:    | /s/ JEFFREY A. WAHBA       |
|------------------------|--------|----------------------------|
|                   |   | Jeffrey A. Wahba,          |
| * *               |   | *Chief  Financial Officer* |

 

----
ex10-14.htm








Exhibit 10.14


 


SECOND AMENDMENT


OF


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


WHEREAS, OTELCO INC. (the “Company”) has previously entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated as of August 24, 2006, with Dennis Andrews (the “Employee”), as amended on December 17, 2008, setting forth the terms and conditions of the Employee’s employment with the Company; and


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Employee desire to amend certain provisions of the Agreement.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree that the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:


 


Base Salary.  Effective January 1, 2011, Section 3(c)(i) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


(i)           Base Salary.  During the Employment Period, the Employee shall receive an annual base salary of $200,000, subject to increase by the Board, which annual base salary shall be further subject to annual increase by an amount equal to at least the increase in the cost of living, if any, between the date of the immediately preceding increase and the date of each such adjustment, based upon the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers, or, if that index is discontinued, a similar index prepared by a department or agency of the United States government (as so increased and adjusted, the “Annual Base Salary”).  The Annual Base Salary shall be paid in accordance with the customary payroll practices of the Company, subject to withholding and other payroll taxes.


 


Bonus.  Effective January 1, 2011, Section 3(c)(ii) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


(ii)           Bonus.  For each fiscal year during the Employment Period, the Employee will be entitled to receive a bonus (the “Bonus”).  The Bonus shall be based upon the Company achieving operating and/or financial goals to be established by the Board or any duly appointed committee thereof in good faith, in its sole discretion.


 


SAVINGS CLAUSE.  Save and except as herein expressly amended, the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.



	  	  	  
	
March 4, 2011

	
OTELCO INC.


	  	  	  
	  	
By:  

	
/s/ Curtis L. Garner, Jr.


	  	Name:     Curtis L. Garner, Jr.
	  	Title:       Chief Financial Officer
	  	  	  
	  	/s/ Dennis Andrews
	  	Dennis Andrews
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Anthony E. Applebaum, Chief Executive Officer of Mera Pharmaceuticals,
certify that (1) Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 3 (a) or
15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained
in the Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005 fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations
of Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


                                      /s/ Anthony E. Applebaum
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Anthony E. Applebaum
                                      Principal Financial and Accounting Officer

                                      February 13, 2006


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Mera
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
--.. .

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN


### 4prll14, 1959

**ask ii**  It ie in the horv o •XC~US~VS~Y r 89, ia which you for a telephone 0 says it 18 ueed en **noelrod.** to Vol. 11, Tuae as rollorer t pm8 or th8 *I) lx a e pt

t h ou a n 6 d otin od

in The 

### etatutee
* a ourt,

t hemed ium

t h r ough

wh ic h aouutlre l

ot , end iron three 00~ all authorityveetoit in the The i uriediatlon0r the Ooleml8sioner8* oollrt 18 limited etr atly to *aountp buelneea*, and the inl tallation 0r a telophono in t& hoppr 0r thm aomleeionor do88 not appear to oome wlthln the ola8elfloatlon or aounty **bueineee**
**.**V

BPn.Frankuri&bt,Apri114,1939, Pag 9

It 18 our opinion thst nelther tha Gvn8titutioa 

### o t Te x a s n or the statutes 

### l

xpraeely or inpliably give to the urbers or the commlealomre~ court authority to Install telephome in thair homes and charge the expense of earn against the aounty. very truly yours

(S+W BY 3. P. Wtts Assistant wPW:AW APPROVED: Gerald c. Mana (sleaed) ATTOIFIEYGBWERALOF TFXAS
CHARLESTON.

#### State *v.*Joe Costa

(No. 5272)

Submitted April 13, 1926.

Decided April 20, 1926.

Criminal *Law*— Argument *That Defendant Does Not Explain by His Own Testimony, or by Any Other Means, Certain Facts,-Was Error, and Required Reveo-sal (Code, e. 32A,*§ *31; c. 152,*§ *19; Const. Art. 3,*§ *5.)*

The ruling of the trial court in a criminal case permitting the prosecuting officer, over objection of the defendant, to comment before the jury upon the failure of defendant to testify in his own behalf, violates Section 19, Chapter 152, Code, and Section 5, Article III of the Constitution, and constitutes reversible error.

(Criminal Law, 16 C. J. § 2247; 17 C. J. § 3639.)

(Note : Parenthetical references by Editors, C. J. — Cye Not part of syllabi.)

Error to Circuit Court, Marion County.

Joe Costá was convicted of transporting intoxicating liquor, and be brings error.

*Reversed and remanded.*

*Shaw & Shaw,*for plaintiff in error.

*Howard B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *J. Luther Wolfe,*Assistant Attorney General for the State.

Lite, Pbesidbnt:

Tbe defendant was tried and convicted in the criminal court of Marion county on an indictment charging him with the unlawful transportation of intoxicating liquors in violation of Section 31, Chapter 32-A, Code. No proof being offered by the defendant, the case was submitted to the jury on the evidence of- the 4 State.

Of numerous errors assigned for reversal, it is asserted that the trial court improperly permitted the assistant prosecuting attorney in violation of Section 19, Chapter 152, Code, to comment upon the failure of the defendant to testify in his *467own 'behalf. The assistant prosecuting attorney, in his argument of the case to the jury, referring to certain incriminating circumstances against the defendant, said: *“He*(the accused) *does not explain by his own testimony,*or by any other means, these facts and circumstances”. Prompt objection by counsel for the defendant to this statement was overruled by the trial court.

The argument complained of clearly violates the right of the defendant guaranteed to him under the statute and Section 5 of Article III. of the Constitution; and therefore constitutes reversible error. Discussing the object of this legis-Tative enactment, in *State*v. *Taylor,*57 W. Va. 228, Judge POEEENBARGER Said:

> “ It is designed to enforce the common law maxim, now embodied in section 5 of article 3 of the Constitution, called the Bill of Rights, which protects the citizen from being required, in any criminal case, to be a witness against himself. One of the most excellent principles of the common law was that the State took upon itself the burden of proving the guilt of the prisoner. * # * So the law, having brought the prisoner into, court against his will, *éid not permit his silence to be treated or used as evidence against him.”*

The other assignments of error are without merit.

We reverse the judment of the trial court, set aside the verdict of the jury, and grant the defendant a new trial.

*Reversed and remanded.*
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I, Sean M. Cary, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Willamette Valley
Vineyards, Incorporated;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the
small business issuer and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: April 14, 2005
_/s/              _
    Sean M. Cary
    Controller
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 06334**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 

### 06334\06334_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 06334\06334_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 06334\06334_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 

### 06334\06334_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06334\06334_PartB.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06334\06334_PartC.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06334\06334_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06334\06334_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 06334\Certification Statement_06334.pdf Plant certification statement x 

### 06334\Supporting Documentation\06334_LOS EPA Inquiry Summer 2010.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 06334\Supporting Documentation\06334_POND-1.doc Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 06334\Supporting Documentation\06334_POND-1.docx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 06334\Supporting Documentation\06334_Water Diagram Material Balance.xls Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 06334\Supporting Documentation\06334_Water Diagram Material Balance.xlsx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
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 Quarterly Report of Zaldiva, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), we, Robert B. Lees, President, and John A. Palmer, Jr., Treasurer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:

     (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.


Dated: 5/11/2006                        /s/Robert B. Lees
      ----------                       ------------------
                                       Robert B. Lees
                                       President

Dated: 5/12/2006                        /s/John A. Palmer, Jr.
      ----------                       -----------------------
                                       John A. Palmer, Jr.
                                       Treasurer
                                       Director