alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[J-28A-2015, J-28B-2015 and J-28C-2015] [MO: Saylor, C.J.] 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, 

 Appellee 

 v. 

JAMES EISEMAN, JR. AND THE PUBLIC 

INTEREST LAW CENTER OF 

PHILADELPHIA, 

 Appellants 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 45 EAP 2014 

Appeal from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court entered on 

02/19/2014 at No. 1935 CD 2012 affirming 

in part and reversing in part the 

determination entered on 09/17/2012 of the 

Office of Open Records at No. 

AP2011-1098. 

ARGUED: May 5, 2015 

AETNA BETTER HEALTH, INC., HEALTH 

PARTNERS OF PHILADELPHIA, INC., 

AND KEYSTONE MERCY HEALTH 

PLAN, 

 Appellees 

 v. 

JAMES EISEMAN, JR., AND THE PUBLIC 

INTEREST LAW CENTER OF 

PHILADELPHIA, 

 Appellants 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 46 EAP 2014 

Appeal from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court entered 02/19/2014 

at No. 1949 CD 2012 affirming in part and 

reversing in part the determination entered 

on 09/17/2012 of the Office of Open 

Records at No. AP2011-1098. 

ARGUED: May 5, 2015 

UNITEDHEALTHCARE OF 

PENNSYLVANIA, INC. D/B/A 

UNITEDHEALTHCARE COMMUNITY 

PLAN AND HEALTHAMERICA 

PENNSYLVANIA INC. D/B/A 

COVENTRYCARES, 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 47 EAP 2014 

Appeal from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court entered 02/19/2014 

at No. 1950 CD 2012 affirming in part and 

reversing in part the determination entered 

on 09/17/2012 of the Office of Open 
[J-28A-2015, J-28B-2015 and J-28C-2015] [MO: Saylor, C.J.] - 2 

 Appellees 

 v. 

JAMES EISEMAN, JR. AND THE PUBLIC 

INTEREST LAW CENTER OF 

PHILADELPHIA, 

 Appellants 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Records at No. AP2011-1098. 

ARGUED: May 5, 2015 

DISSENTING OPINION 

MR. JUSTICE EAKIN DECIDED: October 27, 2015

I agree with the Commonwealth Court’s majority that documents containing MCO 

Rates are not “financial records” within § 102 of the RTKL, 65 P.S. § 67.102. See Dep’t 

of Public Welfare v. Eiseman, 85 A.3d 1117, 1127 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2014) (en banc) 

(“Because MCO Rates are not disbursed ‘by an agency,’ [the] OOR erred in concluding 

MCO Rates are ‘financial records.’”). MCO Rates are rates set by a private company, 

not an agency. The private company disburses the funds — the agency does not. 

While the entire scheme of payment immediately suggests bureaucratic confusion and 

obfuscation, the plain language of the RTKL does not cover this situation — perhaps it 

should, but as it currently exists, in my judgment it does not. 

I would remand the matter to the OOR to decide, in the first instance, whether the 

MCO Rates are exempt from disclosure under § 708(b)(11). Contra id. (“Because we 

conclude the MCO Rates are not ‘financial records,’ we next consider the RTKL 

exceptions that OOR did not fully analyze based on its adherence to Lukes[ v. Dep’t of 

Public Welfare, 976 A.2d 609 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009)]. Typically, we would remand to [the] 

OOR to serve as fact-finder.”). Thus, I respectfully dissent.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofBrooktrout, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Robert C. Leahy, Vice President of Finance and Operations of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)            The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)            The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Date:    | May 10, 2005 | By:      | /s/ ROBERT C. LEAHY                             |
|----------|--------------|----------|-------------------------------------------------|
|     |         |     | Robert C. Leahy                                 |
| * * | * *     | * * | *Vice President of  Finance and Operations*     |
| * * | * *     | * * | *(Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer)* |

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Election Commission.

# Date and Time:

Tuesday, April 14, 2009, and Wednesday, April 15, 2009 at 10 a.m.

# Place:

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

# Status:

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# Items To Be Discussed:

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g.

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a particular employee.

* * * * *

# Person to Contact for Information:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. E9-8170 Filed 4-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
Swanson. Brian (OST) 

From: Steven [steven kellogg @wvwconsulting.com] 

Sent: Thursday, February 25,201012:47 PM 

To: Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Cc: Swanson, Brian (OST); news@pressrepublican.com 

Subject: The Threat to Cape Air in Plattsburgh 

As a resident of the greater Plattburgh area, I was appalled to read in the Plattsburgh-Republican that the legislature has 

indicated that Colgan Air is a preferable alternative to Cape Air, which has been the most positive addition to the 

Plattsburgh Airport since it opened! I have friends and business associates who have come to see me using Cape Air 

and who have raved about the quality of it's service, reliability, and efficiency, which has been my personal experience as 

well. I saw the Frontline special exposing the ineptitude and unprofessionalism of Colgan, and I cannot protest strongly 

enough their introduction into our airport. Please do not allow this to happen! Let us keep Cape Air so that we can utilize 

the airport and not be forced to go to Albany or Burlington! Thank-you for giving this matter every possible 

consideration. Steven Kellogg, Essex, New York 

Steven Kellogg 

steven kellogg @wvw.consulting.com 

1
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Periodic Financial Reports



I, Wayne B. Fuquay, of Analytical Surveys, Inc., certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 (the
Periodic Report) which this statement accompanies 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Analytical Surveys, Inc.



Dated: August 19, 2004



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Wayne B. Fuquay    
|Wayne B. Fuquay        
|Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                            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 Merchants & Manufacturers
Bancorporation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10Q for the period ending June 30,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report), I, Michael J. Murry, Chairman of the Board and Principal
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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; and

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


/s/ Michael J. Murry
--------------------------------
Michael J. Murry
Chairman of the Board and Principal Executive Officer
August 14, 2002
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                         CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP.
                 INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-122637) pertaining to the American Reprographics Company 2005 Stock
Plan and the American Reprographics Company 2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of
American Reprographics Company of our report dated February 28, 2003, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of American
Reprographics Holdings, L.L.C. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2004.

                                                 /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Woodland Hills, California
March 31, 2005
Sharon E. GIBSON, Appellant, v. ARLP TRUST, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2109

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 22, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
* United States District Judge of the Southern District of

Texas, sitting by designation.

** Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 01-50393

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

MURPHY CURTIS CROCKETT,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

(W-98-CR-100-ALL)

February 6, 2002

Before SMITH and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges, and LAKE, District Judge.*

PER CURIAM:**

On October 27, 1998, Murphy Curtis Crockett was convicted of

possession with the intent to distribute crack cocaine. On direct

appeal, this Court affirmed his conviction on January 7, 2000.
1 Crockett also alleged that his counsel was ineffective, but

he did not discuss this ground anywhere in the body of his motion.

2

On February 21, 2000, Crockett filed a pro se motion for new

trial with the district court, alleging newly discovered evidence.1

The district court denied Crockett’s motion. We affirm.

On July 27, 1998, Alethea Drake told the police that Crockett

had drugs in his car. A subsequent search of his vehicle revealed

two bags of marijuana, small pocket scales, and a large amount of

cocaine and crack cocaine. 

Drake testified for the prosecution at Crockett’s trial.

Crockett’s counsel cross-examined her extensively about whether she

“planted” cocaine in Crockett’s automobile because she was angry

that he was with another woman. She consistently denied having

planted any drugs. On October 27, 1998, Crockett was convicted of

possession with the intent to distribute crack cocaine, and this

Court affirmed his conviction on January 7, 2000.

On February 21, 2000, Crockett filed a pro se motion for new

trial with the district court, alleging newly discovered evidence.

Specifically, Crockett presented the court with Drake’s recanting

affidavit stating that she had planted drugs in Crockett’s vehicle.

The district court denied the motion, concluding that, based on a

careful comparison of the trial evidence and the affidavit, the

affidavit was not trustworthy. Crockett urges this Court to

reverse the district court decision. 
3

Motions for new trial based upon newly discovered evidence are

generally disfavored, and we review them with great caution.

United States v. Krenning, 93 F.3d 1257, 1267-68 (5th Cir. 1996).

We will reverse a district court’s denial of a motion for new trial

only upon finding a “clear abuse of discretion.” Id. at 1268.

Here the district court was in the best position to gauge the

credibility of the witnesses at trial and compare the trial

testimony to the recanting affidavit. Spence v. Johnson, 80 F.3d

989, 1003 (5th Cir. 1996) (deferring to district court’s resolution

of the conflict between trial testimony and recanting affidavit).

We find no clear abuse of discretion in its conclusion that Drake’s

recanting affidavit was untrustworthy. Accordingly, we affirm the

district court’s denial of Crockett’s motion for new trial.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          463596
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   758804
<ALLOWANCES>                                    103693
<INVENTORY>                                     449521
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1610265
<PP&E>                                         2612374
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2163851
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2517801
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           420848
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         29705
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2517801
<SALES>                                        1601890
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1601890
<CGS>                                           482322
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1510093
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1388
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  46
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  90363
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              90363
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     90363
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .04


</TABLE>
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1175 

To establish incentive pay for positions requiring specialized skills to combat 

fentanyl trafficking, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 18, 2023 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Mr. CORNYN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To establish incentive pay for positions requiring specialized 

skills to combat fentanyl trafficking, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Combating Online 

5 Fentanyl Trafficking Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 1175 IS

1 SEC. 2. INCENTIVE PAY AUTHORITIES FOR POSITIONS RE2 QUIRING SPECIALIZED SKILLS TO COMBAT 

3 FENTANYL TRAFFICKING. 

4 (a) DEFINITION.—In this Act, the term ‘‘cyber 

5 skills’’ means expertise in computers, computer networks, 

6 information technology, or the internet. 

7 (b) INCENTIVE PAY.—Subject to the availability of 

8 appropriations, and in accordance with the comparable 

9 level of the General Schedule, the Attorney General shall 

10 provide incentive pay, in an amount that is not more than 

11 25 percent of the basic pay of the individual, to any indi12 vidual appointed to a position in the Department of Jus13 tice that requires significant cyber skills to aid in the de14 tection, prevention, or prosecution of fentanyl trafficking. 

15 (c) LIMITATIONS.—Any incentive pay received under 

16 subsection (b) by an individual in a position in the Depart17 ment of Justice— 

18 (1) shall be disregarded in calculating the ag19 gregate of the basic pay and premium pay paid to 

20 the individual for purposes of the pay period limita21 tion and the annual limitation under section 5547 of 

22 title 5, United States Code; and 

23 (2) shall be treated as part of basic pay for 

24 purposes of section 8331(3) of title 5, United States 

25 Code. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                  
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998  
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1997             
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997             
<CASH>                                           1,713                   
<SECURITIES>                                         0                   
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,623                  
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (422)                   
<INVENTORY>                                     53,483                  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                99,763                 
<PP&E>                                          82,612                 
<DEPRECIATION>                                (42,564)                
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 144,852                 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,486                  
<BONDS>                                              0                       
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       
<COMMON>                                            59                      
<OTHER-SE>                                      68,196                  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   144,852                 
<SALES>                                         83,809                  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                83,809                  
<CGS>                                           56,817                  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,817                  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,173                  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   240                     
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 760                     
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,819                  
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,591                   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,228                   
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       
<CHANGES>                                            0                       
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,228                   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .43<F1>                 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42                     

<FN>
<F1>FOR PURPOSES OF THIS EXHIBIT, PRIMARY MEANS BASIC.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      94,065,000
<SECURITIES>                               278,719,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               41,976,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 7,539,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           231,394,000
<PP&E>                                     174,447,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              48,116,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             679,345,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      202,585,000
<BONDS>                                     79,539,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        92,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 251,489,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               679,345,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           530,758,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              485,828,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            29,350,000<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,549,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             12,031,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (423,000)<F2>
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         12,454,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                12,454,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
<FN>
<F1>Merger, Restructuring and CHAMPUS Start-up Expenses
<F2>Income Tax Benefit
</FN>
        

</TABLE>