alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(8 App. Div. 298)

#### In re SEAGRIST’S WILL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 31, 1896.)

Costs—Judgment op Appellate Court.

An award oí costs against the contestants of a will personally on appeal does not charge them personally with the costs of the contest in the surrogate’s court.

*941Appeal from surrogate’s court, New York county.

Proceeding for the probate of the will of 'Nicholas Seagrist, deceased. From an order denying a motion to charge costs of probate personally on Francis S. K. Seagrist and Theresa Seagrist, they appeal. Affirmed.

For report of decision admitting the will to probate see 32 N. Y. Supp. 1095.

Argued before BARRETT, RUMSEY, PATTERSON, and INGRAHAM:, JJ.

George W. Taylor, Jr., for appellants.

Joseph H. Hayes, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Upon making the original decree, which was appealed from, the surrogate exercised his discretion as to the award of costs in the manner which at that time seemed to him just. The order of the appellate division made upon the appeal was not intended to affect the award of costs made by the surrogate, but applied only to the costs of the appeal. It did not follow, because the appellate division awarded costs against the contestants personally upon the appeal, that they should personally be charged with the' costs of the original contest in the surrogate’s court. The direction of the appellate division with regard to costs of the i.^peal had no effect, therefore, upon the decree of the surrogate awarding costs, which stood as effectual unless it was reversed or modified upon the appeal. The fact that the appellate division had awarded costs of the appeal against the contestants personally afforded no reason why the surrogate should change his original award. No other reason was suggested, and therefore the order appealed from was proper, and should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6667

CHARLES C. WILLETT,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DENNIS R. BIDWELL, Warden, in his official and

individual capacity; MARIE GRAHAM, Director,

Health Services, in her official and individual capacity; DOCTOR HOWARD, in her official

and individual capacity; BUREAU OF PRISONS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-96-

3065-AMD)

Submitted: September 16, 1997 Decided: November 14, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles C. Willett, Appellant Pro Se. Earle Bronson Wilson, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his action filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of

Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Willett v. Bidwell, No. CA-96-3065-AMD (D. Md. Apr. 9, 1997;

Apr. 14, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 99.1








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SETION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of World Wireless Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David D. Singer, the President of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, following due inquiry, that I believe 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.





Dated:  November 19, 2002



WORLD WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.By:

/s/    David D. SingerDavid D. Singer President
exv10w7






Exhibit 10.7




Summary of Non-employee Director Meeting Fees and Compensation



We do not pay directors who are also Woodward employees additional compensation for their service
as directors. In addition to reasonable expenses for attending meetings of the Board, non-employee
directors receive the following compensation:




	 	 	 	 	 
	Monthly Retainer
	 	$	3,000	 
	Each Board meeting attended
	 	$	2,000	 
	Telephonic
Board meeting
	 	$	500	 
	Each Committee meeting attended — Chairman
	 	$	2,500	 
	Each Committee meeting attended — all others
	 	$	1,500	 
	Telephonic
Committee Meetings — Chairman
	 	$	1,000	 
	Telephonic
Committee Meetings — all others
	 	$	500	 
	Lead Director — each independent director meeting
	 	$	2,500	 
	Audit Committee Chairman — additional monthly retainer
	 	$	750	 





In addition, annual stock option awards with a fair market value of approximately $60,000 on the
date of grant are granted to each director. In November 2008, the
target market value of the annual stock option awards was increased
to $85,000. The terms of the awards, such as vesting and length of
the award, can be found in the Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement, filed as Exhibit 10.14
to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ended September 30, 2007, and are
incorporated herein by reference. Our directors receive no perquisites.
# Official Journal L 113/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 113 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6431 March 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 113

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6431 March 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/403 of 24 March 2021 laying down rules for the application of Regulations (EU) 2016/429 and (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards model animal health certificates and model animal health/official certificates, for the entry into the Union and movements between Member States of consignments of certain categories of terrestrial animals and germinal products thereof, official certification regarding such certificates and repealing Decision 2010/470/EU (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/403 of 24 March 2021 laying down rules for the application of Regulations (EU) 2016/429 and (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards model animal health certificates and model animal health/official certificates, for the entry into the Union and movements between Member States of consignments of certain categories of terrestrial animals and germinal products thereof, official certification regarding such certificates and repealing Decision 2010/470/EU (
  1
  )

1

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      10,118,000
<SECURITIES>                                38,224,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,490,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                       240
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            82,617,000
<PP&E>                                      21,464,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              11,546,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              92,894,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,742,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,502,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  75,060,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                92,894,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            33,242,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               23,592,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,024,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,086,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,282,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,804,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,804,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24
        

</TABLE>
DOCUMENT NOT IMAGED DUE TO ONE OR MORE REASONS LISTED BELOW:

9 TOO VOLUMINOUS

9 QUALITY NOT LEGIBLE

9 FONT TOO SMALL

9 PHOTOGRAPHS

9 OTHER: __________________________________________________

TO VIEW THE DOCUMENT YOU MUST OBTAIN THE CASE FILE AT THE 

CLERK’S OFFICE. THE CLERK’S OFFICE IS OPEN FROM 8:30 AM. to 4:30 P.M. 

MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY EXCEPT FOR LEGAL HOLIDAYS. TO OBTAIN A 

COPY YOU CAN CALL THE CLERK’S OFFICE SERVICE CENTER AT 

312-435-5699.

Case: 1:03-cv-05933 Document #: 54 Filed: 10/20/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:176
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.02

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
           AS ENACTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2004 of Hartford Life, Inc. (the "Company"), filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 as enacted by
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1)    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
            section 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 results of operations
            of the Company.

                     /s/ Lizabeth H. Zlatkus
                     -----------------------
                     Name:  Lizabeth H. Zlatkus
                     Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                     Date:  November 10, 2004

                                       50
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THIS FROM
10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                         249,600
<SECURITIES>                                     3,732
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,436
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,097
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               338,684
<PP&E>                                          29,973
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,316
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 418,370
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          114,254
<BONDS>                                        250,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            77
<OTHER-SE>                                      53,642
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   418,370
<SALES>                                         55,906
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                85,575
<CGS>                                            1,165
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   87,587
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,784
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,400)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,565
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,965)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,965)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.05)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.05)<F2>
<FN>
<F1>For purposes of this exhibit, primary means basic.
<F2>Amounts have been restated to comply with the provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, "Earnings per share."
</FN>


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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

         THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
    FROM THE HAGLER BAILLY, INC. UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
    FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
                    BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>

       

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         2,998,791
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  36,819,726
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,143,476
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               45,682,359
<PP&E>                                         6,106,963
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,395,425
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 58,928,484
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          11,187,590
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       90,679
<OTHER-SE>                                     46,371,898
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   58,928,484
<SALES>                                        23,642,220
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               23,642,220
<CGS>                                          18,754,380
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  18,754,380
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             37,367
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,619,441
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,021,426
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,598,015
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,598,015
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.17
        


</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Animas Corporation on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
Animas Corporation each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to their respective knowledge: (1) the Report
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Animas Corporation. /s/ Katherine D. CrothallKatherine D. CrothallPresident and Chief Executive OfficerAnimas CorporationMay 16, 2005
 /s/ Richard BaronRichard BaronVice President, Finance and Chief Financial OfficerAnimas CorporationMay 16, 2005
# CE2004065EN.01019902.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/199 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/199

---

(2004/C 65 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2718/03

by Anne Van Lancker (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 2003)

Subject:   Network of cycle paths

Subject:

Belgium has an extensive network of cycle paths for tourism and recreation. Many of these cycle routes have been created thanks to European grants. I should like to have more information about the subsidies granted to Belgian cycle routes.

Can the Commission provide details of the EU subsidies granted to Belgian cycle routes in 2002 in 2003?

What amount was allocated to cycle routes in the province of East Flanders?

What are the Commission's plans for the allocation of European funds in 2004 and subsequent years? Will subsidies be granted for measures in the province of East Flanders?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-2717/03 and E-2718/03

given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2003)

(10 October 2003)

Under the present regional policy rules, in this particular case those on part-financing of projects from the Structural Funds, project selection is an exclusive responsibility of the managing authority for each programme, always of course subject to compliance with the wording of the priorities and measures set out in the programming document and its complement.

Thus the granting of European funds under the structural policy should be looked at as part-financing of projects selected by the Member State rather than as an actual subsidy from the Commission.

For Flanders Region as a whole, 2002 and 2003 has seen approval of cycle route projects totalling EUR 5 582 503,81 for which the Regional Development Fund (ERDF) contribution is EUR 1268 302,96.

1

In the province of Antwerp EUR 277 099 has been granted for the Recreatief fietsroutenetwerk in the Grande Nethe area (total project cost EUR 1 108 394) and in East Flanders EUR 20 834,11 for the Schaarse Wegel cycle route project at Bassevelde (total project cost EUR 83 336,40).

It goes without saying that any cycle route projects that are subsequently presented and are in line with the objectives of the programme measures will be part-financed from the ERDF at the rate specified in the programme complement.

As far as the Walloon Region is concerned, the managing authority for the Meuse-Vesdre Programme expects, for the entire programming period, to approve projects for the cycle route network costing a total of EUR 13 218 470,38, of which the ERDF will pay EUR 6 654 735,19.

No cycle route network projects have been part-financed by the Structural Funds in the Brussels Capital Region in 2002 or in 2003. Given the wording of the measures in the programme it is unlikely that any are to be presented.

---
#### Linda D., Respondent, v Theo C., Appellant.

[945 NYS2d 687]

Judgment of divorce, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered November 22, 2011, after a nonjury trial, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denying defendant any portion of the marital apartment’s appreciation, distributing the marital estate, directing that defendant pay child support of $1,200 per month, and awarding plaintiff counsel and expert fees, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of vacating the award of counsel and expert fees, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Defendant failed to show that the marital apartment, which plaintiff purchased before the marriage, appreciated as a result of his contributions *(see Karas-Abraham v Abraham,*69 AD3d 428, 430 [2010]). Although defendant performed, and marital *433funds helped pay for, some renovations to the apartment, the court-appointed appraiser made no findings that the renovations had any effect on the value of the apartment. In any event, the trial court adequately compensated defendant for his contributions by giving him a credit for one-quarter of the renovation costs *(see Bernholc v Bornstein,*72 AD3d 625, 628 [2010]).

The trial court providently exercised its discretion in distributing the marital estate *(see Fields v Fields,*65 AD3d 297, 303 [2009], *affd*15 NY3d 158 [2010]). The court considered the factors listed in Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (5) (d) and set forth the rationale for its decision *(id.).*

The trial court improvidently exercised its discretion in awarding plaintiff $100,000 for attorneys’ fees and $12,850 for expert fees. The parties’ financial situations were not so disparate as to render this award appropriate *(see generally O'Shea v O'Shea,*93 NY2d 187, 190 [1999]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Freedman and Richter, JJ.