alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

No. 83357


# FILE MAY 1 3 2022
ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF SUPRO4E COURT BY DEPUTCLERK ALI KIA, M.D.; AND NEVADA HOSPITALIST GROUP, LLP, Petitioners, VS . THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JASMIN D. LILLY-SPELLS, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, FRANK J. DELEE, M.D.; FRANK J. DELEE M.D., P.C.; AND SUNRISE HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, LLC; AND CHOLOE GREEN, Real Parties in Interest. ORDER DENYING PETITION This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order denying a motion to dismiss in a medical malpractice action. Having considered the petition and its supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (stating that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Specifically, we generally decline to exercise our discretion to

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A atga. QV-152,43grant writ petitions challenging orders denying motions to dismiss, and we

are not convinced any of the exceptions apply in this case. See Chur v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 68, 70, 458 P.3d 336, 339 (2020) (discussing the exceptions to the general rule). We therefore

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Hardesty •


### Al4CA-

0 J. Stiglich

, Herndon

cc: Hon. Jasmin D. Lilly-Spells, District Judge Hon. Linda M. Bell, Chief Judge Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas Collinson, Daehnke, Inlow & Greco Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP/Las Vegas Law Office of Daniel Marks Hall Prangle & Schoonveld, LLC/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVAOA
(U) I947A 2
#### Euby Graham, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

[720 NYS2d 452]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about November 4, 1999, which, in an action for false arrest and imprisonment, malicious prosecution, negligent hiring and training of police officers and civil rights violations, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action, which is based on the dismissal of an indictment that charged plaintiff with the murder of his wife and plaintiffs imprisonment for some 14 months during the pendency thereof, was properly dismissed upon a record demonstrating probable cause for plaintiffs warrantless arrest *(see, Broughton v State of New York,*37 NY2d 451, 458, *cert denied sub nom. Schanbarger v Kellogg,*423 US 929) and subsequent prosecution *(see, Colon v City of New York,*60 NY2d 78, 82). In particular, the arrest and imprisonment were sufficiently supported by unchallenged evidence that the only eyewitness to the murder, plaintiffs and the victim’s four-year-old daughter, initially reported to the police that her father shot and strangled her mother, and that the victim’s other, ten-year-old, daughter, reported to the police that she heard plaintiffs voice inside the apartment where the murder occurred as her mother begged for her life, and that plaintiff had physically abused her mother on a prior occasion *(see, Shapiro v County of Nassau,*202 AD2d 358, *lv denied*83 NY2d 760, quoting *People v Bigelow,*66 NY2d 417, 423). The malicious prosecution cause of action was *436properly dismissed for failure to raise an issue of fact that the indictment was procured by fraud, peijury, suppression of evidence or other police conduct undertaken in bad faith (see, *Colon v City of New York, supra,*at 83), or prosecuted after evidence came to light demonstrating the absence of probable cause. Although the four-year-old, some four months after the crime, testified in Family Court that her father was not at the scene, the prosecution still had the ten-year-old’s statements, the neighbors’ reports of marital discord between plaintiff and the victim, and the possibility that the four-year-old missed her father. Plaintiffs remaining causes of action were also properly dismissed. The civil rights claim is insufficient for failure to specifically set forth an official policy or custom that caused plaintiff to be deprived of a constitutional right *(see, Jackson v Police Dept.,*192 AD2d 641, 642, *lv denied*82 NY2d 658, *cert denied*511 US 1004), and the record is simply devoid of evidence supporting the causes of action for assault by and inadequate training of police officers. Nor was the motion for summary judgment premature. Plaintiff had ample time to conduct the depositions he now wishes to take, and, in any event, shows nothing more than a “ ‘[m] ere hope’ ” that further disclosure will uncover evidence sufficient to defeat the motion *(see, Jones v Surrey Coop. Apts.,*263 AD2d 33, 38). Concur— Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Rubin and Buckley, JJ.
EXHIBIT 23.2









CONSENT  OF  THE  INDEPENDENT  AUDITOR
  As  the  independent  auditor  for  Critical
Digital Data, Inc., we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this
Form 10-K, pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, of
our report, relating to
the  audited  financial  statements of Critical
Digital Data, Inc. as of September 30, 2009 and 2008 and the related statement
of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flow from date of inception (May 2,
2008) to September 30, 2009.  Our audit report is dated December 14,
2009.
 
  /s/ R. R.
Hawkins & Associates International, a Professional Service
Corporation
 Los
Angeles, California
 December
28, 2009
   5777 W. Century Blvd.  , Suite No. 1500
 Los Angeles, CA 90045
 T: 310.553.5707  F: 310.553.5337
 www.rrhawkins.com
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, J. Roe Buckley, Chief Financial Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. (the“Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

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

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

(c)presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I haveindicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date or our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: May 12, 2005
Exhibit
32.1






CERTIFICATION
OF


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the accompanying Yearly Report on Form 10-K of Maxconcept
International Holdings, Inc., for the year ending July 31, 2009, I, Wong
Wa Kei Anthony, Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
that:




1. Such
yearly Report on Form 10-K for the year ending July 31, 2009, 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 such yearly Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July
31, 2009, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Maxconcept
International Holdings, Inc.


Dated:
      November 10, 2009


Maxconcept
International Holdings, Inc




By:
            /s/
      Wong Wa Kei
      Anthony
              President,
      Secretary,
              Chief
      Financial Officer and Director
Dominic Manuel GAITER v. STATE

CR-15-0001

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 7, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

EGLISE BAPTISTE BETHANIE DE FT. LAUDERDALE, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

AIDA AUGUSTE and USLANDE AUGUSTE,

Appellees.

No. 4D21-2537

[April 14, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Carlos A. Rodriguez, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE20012644.

Anthony Gonzalez of Anthony Gonzalez Law, Coral Gables, for 

appellant.

Hugo A. Rodriguez of The Law Offices of H.A. Rodriguez, P.A., Fort 

Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, GERBER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 1 - 045 5 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. NEIL LYNN NUNES,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 31 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 20 2023

06/20/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0455
Erin ATAC, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-142

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 7, 2017]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 4(c)


 


PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY
 •  {P. O. BOX 10648  •  BIRMINGHAM, 
ALABAMA  35202-0648}


 


RETURN OF PURCHASE PAYMENTS DEATH BENEFIT RIDER


 


We are amending the Contract to
which this rider is attached as described below:


 


1.                                       The
provision entitled “Death Benefit”
in the “DEATH BENEFIT” section of
your Contract is deleted in its entirety.


 


2.                                       The
following provisions are added to the “DEATH BENEFIT”
section of your Contract.


 


Death Benefit - The
death benefit will be determined as of the end of the Valuation Period during
which we receive due proof of death. The death benefit will equal the greater
of:


 


•             the Contract Value;
or


•             aggregate Purchase
Payments less an adjustment for each surrender.


 


For the
purpose of calculating the death benefit, the adjustment for each partial surrender
will equal the amount that reduces the death benefit in the same proportion
that the amount surrendered reduced the Contract Value as of the Valuation
Period during which that surrender was taken.


 


The maximum death
benefit provided under this Rider will never exceed the Contract Value as of
the end of the Valuation Period during which we receive due proof of death plus
$1,000,000.


 


Only one death
benefit is payable under this Contract even though the Contract may, under
certain circumstances, continue beyond the time of an Owner’s death.


 


Enhanced Spousal Continuation Benefit


 


If a sole Beneficiary
is the spouse of a deceased Owner and elects, in lieu of receiving the death
benefit, to continue the Contract and become the new Owner as provided in the
Contract, we will add to the Contract Value an amount equal to the excess of
the death benefit over the Contract Value, if any, as of the date we receive
due proof of death. We will allocate that amount according to the current
Purchase Payment allocation instructions, but the amount we add will not be
considered a Purchase Payment.


 


Suspension of Benefits -
For a period of one year after any change of ownership involving a natural
person, the death benefit will equal the Contract Value.


 


Rider Termination - The Rider will automatically
terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following events


 


(a)          settlement
of a claim for the death benefit;


(b)         the
Contract Anniversary immediately after the oldest Owner attains Age 95;


(c)          a
cancellation, or full surrender of the Contract.


 


Signed for the Company and made
a part of the Contract as of the Effective Date.


 


PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE
COMPANY


 


	
  

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
          {
  Secretary }
Brazillian sugarcane production from the Food and Agriculture Organization

http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/QC/E

Domain Code Domain AreaCode AreaName ElementCode ElementName ItemCode ItemName Year Value

QC Crops 21 Brazil 5510 Production 156 Sugar cane 2009 691,606,147

QC Crops 21 Brazil 5510 Production 156 Sugar cane 2010 717,463,793

QC Crops 21 Brazil 5510 Production 156 Sugar cane 2011 734,006,059

QC Crops 21 Brazil 5510 Production 156 Sugar cane 2012 721,077,287

QC Crops 21 Brazil 5510 Production 156 Sugar cane 2013 768,090,444

FAOSTAT 

Date: Tue Sep 

680,000,000

690,000,000

700,000,000

710,000,000

720,000,000

730,000,000

740,000,000

750,000,000

760,000,000

770,000,000

780,000,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Average annual increase = 2.2%

Brazillian petroleum consumption from EIA

Table: Total Petroleum Consumption (Thousand Barrels Per Day)

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Brazil 2459.303 2698.951 2776.564 2922.934 3003

2200

2300

2400

2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Average annual increase = 4.9%
EXHIBIT
31.2





CERTIFICATIONS





I,
Ping-Shun Lai, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2009, of Asia
Global Holdings Corp.:





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 small business issuer 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 (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) 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:
      February 18, 2010
            /s/
      Ping-Shun LaiPing-Shun
      Lai, Interim Chief Financial
Officer
---

EXHIBIT 31.1


CERTIFICATION





I, David M. Lobach, Jr., certify that:





1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Embassy Bancorp, Inc.;





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 registrant’s other certifying officer 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)) and internal  control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant 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 registrant is made known to us by others, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





(b)  Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;





(c)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’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





(d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.





5.
The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:





(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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.





By:
s/ David M. Lobach Jr.DAVID M. LOBACH, JR.DATED:  March 31, 2010
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
Charles JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-2883

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 21, 2017]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Jonathan Burton VANCE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D16-2704

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed October 4, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
DESIGNATION

OF AGENT FOR SERVICE OF NOTICE, PROCESS, ORDERS DECISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ATTENTION DOCKET SECTION, C-55 __**___, B=E,I,_,JIN~G** **"-"" ._.** **..._ PI** ..... **T...._A..,.L,__AIRL~~IN"-'-'=E=S.._.** C=O==--. **"'"'T...., ~----**  **----- ---''**  having its principal (Name of Company, please print) Office at Cap ital Air lines Building. No.3. Nor lh Cnrgo Rd. Beijing Capi

t a l International Airport 100621 · (address) Hereby designates, pursuant
to section 46103 of Title 49 of the U.S. Code (formerly section 1005(b) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended) the person named below as its Agent upon whom service of all notices processes and all orders, decision, and requirements

of the Department

of Transportation may be made for and on behalf of said carrier, hereby canceling
all previous designations

of agents made by it to the DOT. NameofAgent

_ _______
**J~o~sh R~om~an~o~w**  **~------------------**

**------ --**  Address Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP. 23 00 N Street, NW. Washington. DC 20037 The Agent so designated has written his name and also his initials in the following space: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, BEIJ1NG CAPITAL AIRLINES (Name of Company)

has caused these presents
to be signed in its name by **--- -~--'!..L..:I'--~** **--t- --'-** **X..>..:::L(.c:....:.X_,_1N".:....·_,_.**

, Chief Executive Officer (PteaseJ>r\lt) of said company, and to be attested under its corporate seal by t'-' On this 30 day ofNovember, 2014

By

: ___________

__ __
_ ATTEST: OSTF 1010.5 (1-98)
----

Euro exchange rates (1)

15 July 2005

(2005/C 176/02)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----