alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1759.

#### DAVIS *v.*CITY OF FITZGERALD.

It was not error to dismiss tlie certiorari. The plea in abatement was properly overruled. It is manifest from the context that the word' “furnishing,” employed in section 64 of the act incorporating Fitzgerald (Acts 1907, p. 635) was inserted by a mere clerical mistake, instead of the word “punishing.”

Certiorari, from Ben Hill superior court — Judge Whipple. January 30, 1909.

Submitted March 30, —

Decided July 31, 1909.

*,Eason '&*Bull, for plaintiff in error. *B. Wall,*contra.

Bussell, J.

The plaintiff in error was tried in the mayor's court of Fitzgerald for the violation of an ordinance forbidding the keeping on hand of intoxicating liquors for sale. He filed a plea in abatement, setting up that the city had no authority to pass the ordinance in question, for the reason that the section of the act incorporating the City of Fitzgerald does not authorize the mayor and council to penalize the keeping of intoxicating liquor on hand for illegal sale, but, on the contrary, authorizes the municipality to provide an ordinance for *furnishing*such liquors. The original act of the General Assembly, as enrolled and kept of file in the office of the secretary of State, of course controls, where there is doubt as to the word used by the legislature; but our examination of the enrolled act shows that, strangely enough, the same error obtains in the act as enrolled as is manifest in the charter as printed (Acts 1907, sec. -64, p. 635). The plea in abatement, however, is without merit, because the point could not properly be raised thereby, and the mayor properly overruled it. A plea in abatement can not be used to attack the validity of a law under which a defendant is being tried, and serve the office of a demurrer.

Furthermore, the mayor was right in overruling the plea in abatement because, even if the ordinance could not rest on section 64, and even if, prior to the passage of the prohibition act of 1907 (Acts 1907, p. 81), the council could have provided for the furnishing of *533liquors, the broad provisions of the general welfare clause of the charter of the City of Fitzgerald are ample to authorize the passage of the ordinance, under the terms of which the plaintiff in error was tried; and the passage of the prohibition law withdrew the power-to pass ordinances providing for furnishing intoxicating liquors, and annulled any such ordinances. So much merely in reply to the ingenious argument of counsel. It is plain to our mind that the word “furnishing” in the charter is a mere clerical mistake, and that the legislature intended to provide, in section 64, for punishing, instead of furnishing. The context makes this so plain that the municipal judge properly so construed it. *Central Ry. Co.*v. *Mote,*131 *Ga.*178 (63 S. E. 164). The judge of the superior court properly dismissed the certiorari, upon the ground that the evidence authorized the conviction of the defendant of the violation of a valid ordinance. *Judgment affirmed.*
**Exhibit99.6**
|   | **PricewaterhouseCoopers**          |
|--------|-------------------------------------|
|   | **LLP/s.r.l./s.e.n.c.r.l.**         |
|   | **Chartered Accountants**           |
|   | Place de la Cité, Tour Cominar |
|   | 2640 Laurier Boulevard, Suite 1700  |
|   | Québec, Quebec                 |
|   | Canada G1V 5C2                      |
|   | Telephone +1 (418) 522 7001         |
|   | Facsimile +1 (418) 522 5663         |

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

We hereby consent to the usein this amended Annual Report on Form 40-F/A of Æterna Zentaris Inc. for theyear ended December 31, 2006 of our auditors’ report dated March 2, 2007,except as to Note 24(g) and (h) which is as of September 17, 2007, onthe consolidated balance sheets of Æterna Zentaris Inc. as at December 31, 2006and 2005 and the consolidated statements of operations, deficit, other capitaland cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December31, 2006.

**Chartered Accountants**

Quebec, Quebec, Canada

September 17, 2007

PricewaterhouseCoopers refers to the Canadian firm ofPricewaterhouseCoopers LLP/s.r.l./s.e.n.c.r.l. and the other member firms ofPricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each of which is a separate andindependent legal entity. 

----
Travis T. DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3787

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
CERTIFICATIONS

I, Eppie Wong, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Digital Network Alliance International, 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 officers 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, 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)         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 (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

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

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 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.

Date: July 30, 2008

/s/ Eppie Wong, CFO and a director
Exhibit 10.13  Axcelis Technologies, Inc. Non-Employee Director Cash Compensation at March 11, 2015  This Exhibit discloses the current understandings with respect to cash compensation between Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (the Company) and each of its non-employee directors. Axcelis provides both cash retainers and meeting fees to its non-employee directors, as follows:  Annual Retainers (paid quarterly in advance)  Board Member Position

AmountLead Director

$
50,000Non-Employee Board Member (not Lead Director)

$
30,000Audit Committee Chair*

$
15,000Compensation Committee Chair*

$
10,000Nominating Committee Chair*

$
7,500  
 *Retainers for Committee Chairs are in addition to the retainer payable to all non-employee Board members.  To the extent that other committees are formed by the Board, similar retainers may be approved for the committee chairmen.  Meeting Fees (payable quarterly in arrears)  Meeting Type

AmountIn Person Board Meetings

$
2,000Telephone Board Meetings

$
1,000In Person or Telephone Committee Meetings**

$
1,000  
 **Committee meeting fees are paid only to committee members, and not to other Board members, attending committee meetings.  Non-employee directors also receive reimbursement of out-of- pocket expenses incurred in attending Board and committee meetings. Non- employee directors do not receive any Company-paid perquisites  1
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_science(17)
              - (-)products_data(2)
              - products_publications(42)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_image(4)
              - multimedia_image-141771(3)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - news_news-149245(2)
              - news_news-149248(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(2)
              - american samoa(1)
              - california(7)
              - colorado(11)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - connecticut(6)
              - district of columbia(1)
              - florida(5)
              - georgia(1)
              - guam(1)
              - hawaii(2)
              - kansas(3)
              - maine(3)
              - massachusetts(4)
              - montana(3)
              - nevada(1)
              - new hampshire(2)
              - new jersey(8)
              - (-)new mexico(2)
              - new york(12)
              - north carolina(1)
              - oklahoma(3)
              - oregon(1)
              - pennsylvania(4)
              - puerto rico(4)
              - rhode island(6)
              - south carolina(1)
              - u.s. virgin islands(2)
              - vermont(3)
              - virginia(5)
              - washington(2)

## By Year

Real-time Data        March 13, 2018        WaterWatch

Data Release        April 5, 2019        Data supporting the 2017 geomorphic survey of North Fork Eagle Creek, New Mexico
Davion SANDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1133

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed February 8, 2019

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Sean Kevin Gravel, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah A. Chance, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Davion Sanders appeals the judgment and sentence entered against him after the trial court found that he violated several conditions of his probation. We affirm in all respects, except for the finding that Sanders violated condition six of his probation. As to condition six, which prohibited Sanders from associating with a person *289known to engage in criminal activity, the State concedes, and we agree, that evidence of a positive drug test did not support a finding that Sanders violated this condition. *See**Cromartie v. State*, 241 So.3d 970, 971 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). Such error is fundamental. *See**Odom v. State*, 15 So.3d 672, 678 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). Nevertheless, we find that it is clear from the record that the trial court would have made the same decision to revoke Sanders' probation and sentence him accordingly1 had it properly found that there was no evidence Sanders associated with a person engaged in criminal activity. *Id.* (citing *Reed v. State*, 127 So.3d 817, 819-20 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) ).

Accordingly, we affirm Sanders' judgment and sentence but remand with directions that the trial court strike that portion of the order finding a violation of condition six.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

BERGER, WALLIS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

1

Sanders was sentenced to 180 months in the Department of Corrections for both of the underlying charges of Attempted First-Degree Premeditated Murder and Possession of a Firearm by a Delinquent. The trial court ordered that the sentences run concurrently.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**Ilan Kinreich,President and Chief Executive Officer**

I, Ilan Kinreich, certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K of RadView Software Ltd.;

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

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.                 The registrant’sother 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)) for the registrant and we have:

a)               designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b)              evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)               disclosed in thisreport 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’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

a)               all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)              any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant  role in the registrant’sinternal controls.

| Date: April 13, 2006 |   | /s/ ILAN KINREICH                     |
|---------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Ilan Kinreich                         |
|                      |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
Gloria JONES v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, et al.

NO. 2018-C-1374

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

January 28, 2019

Denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant and docket.

GENOVESE, J., would grant in part as to the issue of legal interest only.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31050]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IN24-2-000]

American Efficient, LLC; Modern Energy Group LLC; MIH LLC; 
Midcontinent Energy LLC; Wylan Energy, L.L.C.; Affirmed Energy LLC; 
Updated Notice of Designation of Commission Staff as Non-Decisional

    With respect to an order issued by the Commission on December 16, 
2024, in the above-captioned docket, with the exceptions noted below, 
the staff of the Office of Enforcement are designated as non-decisional 
in deliberations by the Commission in this docket.\1\ Accordingly, 
pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2202 (2024), they will not serve as advisors to 
the Commission or take part in the Commission's review of any offer of 
settlement. Likewise, as non-decisional staff, pursuant to 18 CFR 
385.2201 (2024), they are prohibited from communicating with advisory 
staff concerning any deliberations in this docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ American Efficient, LLC, Modern Energy Group LLC, MIH LLC, 
Midcontinent Energy LLC, Wylan Energy, L.L.C., Affirmed Energy LLC, 
189 FERC ] 61,196 (2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exceptions to this designation as non-decisional are:

Nicholas Stavlas
Michael Raibman
Thomas Olson
Mark Maneche
Yvonne Yegge
Kevin Dinan
Charles Kitcher
Jennifer Gordon
Gareth Jones
Ian McDonald
Sam Malech
Erin Miller
Sara Brehm
Serrita Hill
Steven Bundick

    Dated: December 19, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-31050 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
    /s/ Ronald A. Klein
    
    Dated: March 15, 2006Ronald A. Klein, Chief Executive Officer/s/ W. Anderson Geater, Jr.
    
    Dated: March 15, 2006W. Anderson Geater, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Alvatina FLUCKER, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA COMMISSION ON OFFENDER REVIEW, Respondent.

No. 1D17-3579

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 28, 2018 Rehearing Denied December 13, 2018

Alvatina Flucker, pro se, Petitioner.

Rana Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark Hiers, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

*502The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

Wetherell, Rowe, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 30, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 18, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 553 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-886, K2025-887.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31008 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earthquakes

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Filters

              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(4)
              - california(3)
              - colorado(1)
              - virginia(10)
              - (-)washington(1)

## By Year

              - 2024(1)
              - 2023(1)
              - (-)2022(1)
              - 2020(1)

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

staff profileJoan Gomberg
Jose Bello VALDEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3838

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 6, 2018]

Roy J. Kahn, Miami, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Heidi L. Bettendorf, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed* .

Warner, Damoorgian and Kuntz, JJ., concur.