alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Nat'l Clonal Germplasm Rep - Tree Fruit & Nut Crops & Grapes: Davis, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Orders & ServicesSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Davis, California Nat'l Clonal Germplasm Rep - Tree Fruit & Nut Crops & Grapes Docs Grape Relatives Inventory







Mainheadline bar Repository Inventory of Available Grape Relatives In Order by Species & Country of Origin  Available Ampelopsis AccessionsAccession IDSpeciesPI #CultivarCountry of OriginDVIT2122.speciesUnknownDVIT2124.aconitifoliaUnknownDVIT2594.aconitifoliaAsiaDVIT3137.arboreaUnited StatesDVIT2595.brevipedunculataUnknownDVIT3140.cordataUnited StatesDVIT3143.cordataUnited StatesDVIT2128.speciesUnknownDVIT2345.vitifoliaPakistanDVIT2346.vitifoliaPakistanDVIT2347.vitifoliaPakistanDVIT2348.vitifoliaPakistanDVIT2358.vitifoliaPakistanAvailable Parthenocissus AccessionsAccession IDSpeciesPI #CultivarCountry of OriginDVIT2607.quinquefoliaMexicoDVIT2400.quinquefoliaUnited States
  **Questions?**Email: Bernie PrinsFind an order form on our Products & Servicespage


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### In the Matter of Queller, Fisher, Washor, Fuchs *&*Kool, LLP, Appellant, v Law Offices of Lawrence P. Biondi, Respondent.

[942 NYS2d 793]

In a proceeding to allocate an attorney’s fee pursuant to Judiciary Law § 475, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Strauss, J.), dated February 8, 2011, which, in effect, granted its petition only to the extent of directing that it recover an attorney’s fee for its work in an action entitled *DeOliveira v State of New York*on a quantum meruit basis.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly concluded that the petitioner law firm does not have a charging lien entitling it to a percentage of the contingent attorney’s fee recovered by a successor law firm through settlement of a second action commenced by that firm. The second action was commenced against a different defendant who was independently liable for the personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, and the petitioner did not demonstrate that its efforts in commencing the first action contributed to the commencement or settlement of the second action *(see Rothfeder v City of New York,*48 AD3d 234, 235 [2008]; *Chadbourne & Parke, LLP v AB Recur Finans,*18 AD3d 222, 223 [2005]; *cf. Matter of Cohen v Grainger, Tesoriero & Bell,*81 NY2d 655, 657-658 [1993]). Under these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to recover an attorney’s fee for its work on a quantum meruit basis only in the first action it commenced *(see Rothfeder v City of New York,*48 AD3d at 235). Skelos, J.P., Dillon, Eng and Austin, JJ., concur.
#### Wright Mercantile & Lumber Co. *v.*Eton Mercantile Co.

February 12, 1915.

Complaint. Before Judge Eite. Murray superior court. August 11, 1913.

*William E. Mann,*for plaintiff in error.

Per Curiam.

1. An attachment which has never been levied is not such a pending suit as may be pleaded in abatement to a subsequent action in personam.

2. The voluntary abandonment of an attachment which had never been - levied, and the subsequent bringing of an action in personam, without payment of the magistrate’s costs in issuing the attachment or making affidavit of inability to pay such costs, was not ground for abating the latter suit under Civil Code (1910), §§ 5625, 5626.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., absent.*
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135516 & (17)(18) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135516 

 COA: 281278 

Oakland CC: 94-130590-FC 

GREGORY ALAN FERQUERON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 1, 2007 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s 

motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G). The motion to remand 

and the motion for production of records are DENIED. 

p0616 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

June 23, 2008 

 Clerk
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                    EXHIBIT 21.1
SUBSIDIARIES
<C>  <S>                                 <C>

 1.  DAHOMEY RESOURCE CORPORATION        BAHAMAS
 2.  LIBERTY TECHNICAL SERVICES LTD.     BAHAMAS
 3.  WEST AFRICAN RESOURCE CORPORATION   BAHAMAS
 4.  ABACAN RESOURCES (BENIN) LIMITED    BAHAMAS
 5.  ABACAN RESOURCES (DELTA) LIMITED    BAHAMAS
 6.  ABACAN TECHNICAL SERVICES LTD.      BAHAMAS
 7.  ABACAN POWER BENIN LIMITED          BAHAMAS
 8.  ABACAN RESOURCES (NIGERIA) LTD.     NIGERIA
 9.  AGBARA RESOURCES LIMITED            BAHAMAS
10.  ANGUS INTERNATIONAL RESOURCES LTD.  BAHAMAS
11.  PROFILE INTERNATIONAL LTD.          BAHAMAS
12.  ABACAN-ADDAX BENIN CONSORTIUM S.A.  BENIN
13.  ABACAN SERVICES (U.K.) LIMITED      UK
14.  ABACAN SERVICES (USA) LIMITED       TEXAS
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Blount International, Inc. on Form S-3 (File No. 33-46543), Form S-8 (File No.
33-51580), Form S-8 (File No. 33-56801) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-14261) of our
report dated January 26, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedules of Blount International, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and for the year ended December
31, 1997, the ten months ended December 31, 1996 and the year ended February 29,
1996, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Atlanta, Georgia
January 26, 1998
                                   Page 50
<PAGE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
SABRI IBRAHIM SAMITRAH,
Plaintiff,
vs. No, 03 C 1298

ALBERTO GONZALES, Attorney
General of the United States, et al.,

Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court of Appeals has denied the government’s section J292 petition and, therefore,
the parties must proceed here, That Icd to plaintiff initiating discovery, including

interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and the taking of depositions. The

government responded by seeking a protective order or, alternatively, seeking to stay discovery

pending the filing and adjudication of motions for summary judgment. That response led, in
turn, to plaintiff's motion to compel. Plaintiff believes he needs discovery before dealing with
any summary judgment issues. The government disagrees, contending that the issues are
essentially legal. And, on this onc, we agree with the government. Accordingly, we grant the
motion for a protective order and deny the motion to compel.

Plaintiff characterizes what happened before as a ruling by this court that the
revocation of adyance parole violated his due process rights. That is not quite accurate.
Rather, we concluded that plaintiff’s long residence in this country entitled him to a hearing
before any determination as to whether or not he should be excluded. That is essentially a

legal issue, and it remains pending before this court through various theories we determined



NO. 03 C 1298 Page 2

had not been concluded by the Court of Appeals, But any hearing would be an administrative
proceeding, not a hearing before this court, The discovery plaintiff secks is largely related to
the justification for exclusion, but that is a matter for exploration in the administrative hearing
if one is provided. The justifications arc, we believe, irrelevant to the issue of whether or not
plaintiff is entitled to a hearing, and, if now pursued, would undoubtedly open up another set
of issues — to what extent can the government refuse to provide information or to restrict its
dissemination on the basis of privilege or national security, or the like.

What the government did and did not do has never been, so far as we can tell, a matter
of dispute, and if there is something of that nature not yet part of the record, we are confident
that the parties can agree upon any necessary stipulations. We think that the time has come
to try to bring this to an end. [f in the course of that effort there is some factual matter that
has to be resolved, the parties can bring it to the court’s attention. But we do not anticipate

that will be necessary.

JAMES B. MORAN

. nior Judge, U. 8. District Court
AS, 2007.
**Exhibit
31.1**
   *Certification*
   
   I, Joann
Agee, certify that:
   1.
    I
      have reviewed this Form 10-KSB of eLinear,
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 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)) 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.
 c.
    Disclosed
      in this report any change in the Registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers fourth
      fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasinably likely to
      materially affest, 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:
March 18, 2005
 
 
 /s/
Joann Agee ________________________
 Joann
Agee, Principal Accounting Officer
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

** **

I, PaulGothard, certify that:

 

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

 

2.Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this 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 report;

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures 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 report is being prepared;

 

(b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
|           |                    |
|----------------|-------------------------|
|           | By:                     | /s/ PAUL A. GOTHARD |   |
|           | Paul Gothard            |
|           | Chief Financial Officer |
| March 29, 2006 |                    |

 

E-3

----
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 2 of 7 PageID #:2
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:3
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 4 of 7 PageID #:4
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 5 of 7 PageID #:5
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 6 of 7 PageID #:6
Case: 1:02-cv-00919 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/06/02 Page 7 of 7 PageID #:7
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 1 of 38 PageID #:7
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 2 of 38 PageID #:8
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 3 of 38 PageID #:9
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 4 of 38 PageID #:10
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 5 of 38 PageID #:11
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 6 of 38 PageID #:12
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 7 of 38 PageID #:13
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 8 of 38 PageID #:14
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 9 of 38 PageID #:15
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 10 of 38 PageID #:16
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 11 of 38 PageID #:17
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 12 of 38 PageID #:18
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 13 of 38 PageID #:19
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 14 of 38 PageID #:20
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 15 of 38 PageID #:21
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 16 of 38 PageID #:22
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 17 of 38 PageID #:23
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 18 of 38 PageID #:24
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 19 of 38 PageID #:25
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 20 of 38 PageID #:26
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 21 of 38 PageID #:27
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 22 of 38 PageID #:28
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 23 of 38 PageID #:29
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 24 of 38 PageID #:30
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 25 of 38 PageID #:31
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 26 of 38 PageID #:32
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 27 of 38 PageID #:33
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 28 of 38 PageID #:34
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 29 of 38 PageID #:35
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 30 of 38 PageID #:36
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 31 of 38 PageID #:37
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 32 of 38 PageID #:38
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 33 of 38 PageID #:39
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 34 of 38 PageID #:40
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 35 of 38 PageID #:41
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 36 of 38 PageID #:42
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 37 of 38 PageID #:43
Case: 1:03-cv-03245 Document #: 26 Filed: 05/15/03 Page 38 of 38 PageID #:44
#### In the Matter of State Division of Human Rights, Petitioner, v APPLES, Inc., et al., Respondents.

Petition to compel respondents to comply with the order of the State Division of Human Rights dated September 22, 1983, unanimously granted, without costs and without disbursements, and respondents directed to comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 of the State Division of Human Rights order dated September 22, 1983, by paying to complainant, Olga M. Drum, the sum of $3,140 for the period February 24,1981 to June 1,1981, less any moneys earned by said complainant, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from April 14, 1981, in accordance with CPLR 5001 (b) and 5004. No opinion. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Ross, Lynch, Milonas and Ellerin, JJ.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER




PURSUANT
TO




18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,




AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Paul
DePond, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge, the
Quarterly Report of Notify Technology Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
quarter ended December 31, 2008 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Notify Technology
Corporation.





By:
                                  /s/ Paul F. DePondName:
                                  Paul
      F. DePondTitle:
                                  Chief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive
Officer)


Date:
February 13, 2009





I,
Gerald W. Rice, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge,
the Quarterly Report of Notify Technology Corporation on Form 10-Q for the
fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2008 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
Notify Technology Corporation.





By:
                                /s/ Gerald W. RiceName:
                                Gerald
      W. RiceTitle:
                                Chief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial
Officer)




Date:
February 13, 2009





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Notify Technology Corporation and will be retained by Notify Technology
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.