alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Susan J. Drucker, Appellant, v Hofstra University et al., Respondents.

[719 NYS2d 263]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of Herman A. Berliner, as Provost of Hofstra University, dated June 14, 1999, to terminate the petitioner’s employment as Chair of the Department of Speech Communication and Rhetorical Studies, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winick, J.), entered March 1, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The determination to remove the petitioner as Chair of the Department of Speech Communication and Rhetorical Studies because of her failure to maintain “an effective communication climate” with her faculty, in violation, *inter alia,*of Hofstra University’s Faculty Policy Series No. 13, § I (C), was not arbitrary, capricious, or irrational *(see,*CPLR 7803 [3]; *Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222). Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, she was not hired unconditionally. According to the collective bargaining agreement, which was incorporated by reference into the petitioner’s contract of employment, she could be removed for “good cause” upon the *473filing of a petition signed by two-thirds of the membership of her department, followed by a meeting between the dean and the department membership (see, Collective Bargaining Agreement article 21.4; Faculty Policy Series No. 13, § 8). The record discloses that the respondents followed their own procedures, and the petitioner had ample opportunity to present her side of the case (see, *Maas v Cornell Univ.,*94 NY2d 87, 92; *Matter of Olsson v Board of Higher Educ.,*49 NY2d 408, 413; *Matter of Comeau v Board of Educ.,*160 AD2d 1150, 1151). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Gary L. Dreher, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of AMDL, Inc.2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented inthis annual report;4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the small business issuer and have:a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is beingprepared;b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on suchevaluation; andc) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sauditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; andb) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:June 20, 2007   /s/ Gary L. Dreher   Gary L. Dreher  Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 11, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 10618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5174]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-63,575]


Philips Consumer Lifestyle, Including On-Site Leased Workers From 
Ryder Integrated Logistics, Ledgewood, NJ; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and 
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as 
amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility 
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade 
Adjustment Assistance on July 16, 2008, applicable to workers of 
Philips Consumer Lifestyle, Ledgewood, New Jersey. The notice was 
published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2008 (73 FR 44284). The 
certification was amended on September 12, 2008 to include employees of 
the subject firm working at various locations in multiple States (TA-W-
63,575A--TA-W-63,575H). The notice was published in the Federal 
Register on September 23, 2008 (73 FR 54859-54860).
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged 
in the production of antennas and packaged electronic accessories.
    New information shows that workers leased from Ryder Integrated 
Logistics were employed on-site at the Ledgewood, New Jersey location 
of Philips Consumer Lifestyle. The Department has determined that these 
workers were sufficiently under the control of the subject firm to be 
considered leased workers.
    Based on these findings, the Department is amending this 
certification to include workers leased from Ryder Integrated Logistics 
working on-site at the Ledgewood, New Jersey location of the subject 
firm.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Philips Consumer Lifestyle who were adversely affected by a 
shift in production of antennas and packaged electronic accessories to 
China.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-63,575 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Philips Consumer Lifestyle, including on-site 
leased workers from Ryder Integrated Logistics, Ledgewood, New 
Jersey, who became totally or partially separated from employment on 
or after June 18, 2007, through July 16, 2010, are eligible to apply 
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 
1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade 
adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 2nd day of March 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-5174 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 32.2   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 on Form 10-Q of United Wisconsin Grain Producers, LLC (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Barb Bontrager, Chief Financial Officer 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, that:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Barb Bontrager Barb Bontrager Chief Financial Officer  Dated: November 14, 2008
ALASKAN SEAFOOD

CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE 

EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0652

DCN:_ 00198CBI

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Jacinta Sit, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Oxford Technologies, Inc. on the Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Oxford Technologies, Inc.







|                        |  |     |  |                                                              
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |     |  |                                                              
|Date: November 25, 2009 |  | By: |  | /s/Jacinta Sit                                               
|                        |  |     |  | Jacinta Sit, President                                       
|                        |  |     |  | (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT
23

















Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











Capitol
Bancorp Ltd.


Lansing,
Michigan










We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos.
333-15111, 333-153121, 333-122278, 333-104665, 333-84009, and 333-41215 on Form
S-3, Registration Statements Nos. 333-157263, 333-139235, 333-137910,
333-137367, 333-129778, 333-128850, 333-124417, 333-116571, 333-113931, and
333-115110 on Form S-4 and Registration Statements Nos. 333-122278, 333-144180,
333-137092, 333-126206, 333-105339, 333-105314, 333-99175, 333-97189, and
333-30521 on Form S-8 of Capitol Bancorp Ltd. of our reports dated March 11,
2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of
Capitol Bancorp Ltd.'s internal control over financial reporting, which appear
on pages F-35 – F-37 in the Annual Report to shareholders (Financial Information
Section), which is incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2008.










/s/ BDO
Seidman, LLP








March 12,
2009


Grand
Rapids, Michigan
exv10wfw3






EXHIBIT 10.F.3




AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE

EL PASO CORPORATION

SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS PLAN




     Pursuant to Section 6.7 of the El Paso Corporation Supplemental Benefits Plan, Amended and
Restated effective as of December 7, 2001, as amended (the “Plan”), the Plan is hereby amended as
follows, effective December 15, 2004:



     Section 6.7 is hereby amended by adding the following new paragraph at the end thereof:




     “The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (the “Act”) imposes certain restrictions on
deferred compensation plans such as the Plan, effective for 2005 and later years, which
might result in unfavorable tax consequences to participants if the terms of the Plan do
not comply with the Act. Specific guidance regarding the terms and effect of the Act is
expected from the Internal Revenue Service, but may not be published in time to amend the
Plan prospectively, before the Act becomes effective. Therefore, notwithstanding this or
any other provision of the Plan to the contrary, the Board or the Compensation Committee
and the Management Committee, as appropriate, reserve the right to amend the Plan in any
manner that is determined to be appropriate, or to terminate the Plan and adopt a plan
designed to replace this Plan and be in compliance with the Act, retroactively, to comply
with the requirements imposed on nonqualified deferred compensation plans by the Act, as
codified in Section 409A of the Code, and regulations to be promulgated thereunder.”



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this amendment to be duly executed on this 15th day
of December, 2004.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	EL PASO CORPORATION

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Susan B. Ortenstone
 	 
	 	 	Susan B. Ortenstone 	 
	 	 	Its Senior Vice President,


Human Resources 	 
	 



	 	 	 	 	 
	Attest:
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ David L. Siddall	 	 
	 	 	 
	Corporate Secretary
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT 

GAMESA ENERGY USA, LLC AND 

GAMESA TECHNOLOGY 

CORPORATION INC.,

Petitioners

v.

TEN PENN CENTER ASSOCIATES, L.P. 

AND SAP V TEN PENN CENTER NF G.P. 

L.L.C.,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 139 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

GAMESA ENERGY USA, LLC AND 

GAMESA TECHNOLOGY 

CORPORATION INC.,

Respondents

v.

TEN PENN CENTER ASSOCIATES, L.P. 

AND SAP V TEN PENN CENTER NF G.P. 

L.L.C.,

Petitioners

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 152 EAL 2018

Cross Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal from the Order of the Superior 

Court 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 20th day of August, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal at 

139 EAL 2018 is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioners, are:
1. May a litigant simultaneously pursue inconsistent, alternative remedies in a 

civil action in Pennsylvania prior to the entry of final judgment?

2. When one party to a contract breaches, should the non-breaching party be 

permitted to continue performance, if reasonable under the circumstances, 

and to maintain, in the alternative, causes of action for termination of the 

agreement if material, or if not material, for damages from the breach? 

The Cross Petition for Allowance of Appeal at 152 EAL 2018 is DENIED.
exhibit10_21.htm


    
 

    EXHIBIT
10.21

    SUMMARY
OF KEY TERMS OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS

     WITH
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY HOLDINGS COMPANY

     NAMED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS

    


    MidAmerican
Energy Holdings Company’s (“MEHC”) continuing named executive officers each
receive an annual salary and participate in health insurance and other benefit
plans on the same basis as other employees, as well as certain other
compensation and benefit plans described in MEHC’s Annual Report on Form
10-K.

    


    The named
executive officers are also eligible to receive a cash incentive award under
MEHC’s Performance Incentive Plan (“PIP”). The PIP provides for a discretionary
annual cash award that is determined on a subjective basis and paid in December.
In addition to the PIP, the named executive officers are eligible to receive
discretionary cash performance awards periodically during the year to reward the
accomplishment of significant non-recurring tasks or projects. Messrs. David L.
Sokol and Gregory E. Abel have not been granted discretionary cash performance
awards in the past five years. Messrs. Patrick J. Goodman and Douglas L.
Anderson and Ms. Maureen E. Sammon are participants in MEHC’s Long-Term
Incentive Partnership Plan (“LTIP”). Messrs. Sokol and Abel do not participate
in the LTIP. A copy of the LTIP is attached as Exhibit 10.11 to the MEHC Annual
Report on Form 10-K. Messrs. Sokol and Abel are participants in MEHC’s
Incremental Profit Sharing Plan (“IPSP”). Messrs. Goodman and Anderson and Ms.
Sammon do not participate in the IPSP. A copy of Mr. Sokol’s IPSP and
Mr. Abel’s IPSP are attached as Exhibits 10.2 and 10.4, respectively, to
the MEHC Annual Report on Form 10-K.

    


    Base
salary for continuing named executive officers for MEHC’s fiscal year ending
December 31, 2010, is shown in the following table:

    


    
      	
              Name
      and Title

            	
              Base
      Salary

            
	
              David
      L. Sokol

              Chairman
      of the Board

            	
              $750,000

            
	 	 
	
              Gregory
      E. Abel

              President
      and Chief Executive Officer

            	
              $1,000,000

            
	 	 
	
              Patrick
      J. Goodman

              Senior
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

            	
              $340,000

            
	 	 
	
              Douglas
      L. Anderson

              Senior
      Vice President and General Counsel

            	
              $308,000

            
	 	 
	
              Maureen
      E. Sammon

              Senior
      Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer

            	
              $221,000

            


    

    


    Messrs.
Sokol and Abel are directors of MEHC, but do not receive additional compensation
for their service as directors other than what they receive as employees of
MEHC. The other members of the MEHC board of directors do not receive
compensation for their service as directors.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of East KansasAgri-Energy, LLC (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2004, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Jill Zimmerman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   |    /s/ Jill Zimmerman       |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |
|   | Dated: November 15, 2004              |

 

----
#### William H. Grubey v. Ira M. White.

*Gambling Debt—Judgment by Default—Motion to Set Aside—See. 135, Criminal Code.*

1. The latter part of Sec. 135, Chap. 38, R. S., authorizing judgments based on gambling contracts to be set aside on motion, has no reference to adversary judgments. It applies only to. judgments “ given ” by confession or by consent.

2. A judgment by default can not, therefore, be set aside on motion under said section.

[Opinion filed August 3, 1887.]

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Bollin S. Williamson, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. Francis A. Biddle and John S. Stevens, for appellant.

*605Mr. D. M. Kjbtou, for appellee.

*Per Curiam.*

Appellee recovered a judgment by default against appellant for the sum of §355 and costs of suit. Appellant moved the court to sot the judgment aside, without showing any diligence or any excuse for not making his defense at the proper time, but alone upon the ground that the debt on which the judgment was based was a gambling debt, growing out of transactions and deals in “puts” and “calls” on the open board of trade.

Counsel for appellant bases his argument in favor of setting aside the judgment upon Sec. 135, of Chap. 38, R. S., which section is as follows:

“ All judgments, mortgages, assurances, bonds, notes, bills, specialties, promises, covenants, agreements and other acts, deeds, securities or conveyances, given, granted, drawn or executed contrary to the provisions of this act, may be set aside and vacated by any court of equity, upon bill filed for that purpose, by the person so granting, giving, entering into or executing the same, or by his executors or administrators, or by any creditor, heir, purchaser or other person interested therein; or if a judgment, the same may be set aside on motion of any person aforesaid, on due notice thereof given.”

The latter part of said section authorizing judgments to be set aside on motion has no reference to adversary judgments.' Judgments “given,” *i.*e., given by confession or by consent, contrary to the provisions of the act, may be set aside on motion, but judgments taken in the regular manner, for want of a defense interposed, no collusion or consent being shown, are not “given” contrary to the provisions of the act. They are adverse judgments and though, if based on a gambling debt, they can, under this statute, be set aside by a court of equity, where there has been a neglect or failure to assert the defense at law; yet at law they are like other judgments conclusive against the party who might have, but did not interpose his defense. We are of opinion that the court below was correct in refusing to set aside the judgment,’ and there being no error the judgment will be affirmed.

*Judgment affi/i'ined.*
Order entered October 10 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 16 - 00916 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF A .W.L., A CHILD On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court

Dal las County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF - 15 - 03681



### O RDER We GRANT appellant’s October 5, 2016 motion to extend time to file his brief and ORDER the brief filed no lat er than Monday November 7 , 2016.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE