alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jamie Hendrickson, Appellant, v John Williams, Jr., Respondent.

[942 NYS2d 800]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Saitta, J.), dated August 4, 2010, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant met his prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The defendant submitted competent medical evidence establishing, prima facie, that the alleged injuries to the cervical region of the plaintiffs spine and right shoulder did not constitute serious injuries within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see Staff v Yshua,*59 AD3d 614 [2009]; *Rodriguez v Huerfano,*46 AD3d 794, 795 [2007]). The defendant also submitted evidence establishing, prima facie, that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under the 90/180-day category of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(cf. Leeber v Ward,*55 AD3d 563, 564 [2008]).

In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Angiolillo, J.R, Florio, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains information extracted form the consolidated
balance sheet and the consolidated statement of operations filed as part
of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q and is qaulified in its entirety by
reference to such quarterly report on Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      16,182,596
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,999,154
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            35,034,007
<PP&E>                                      39,497,878
<DEPRECIATION>                               (727,328)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              77,043,444
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,931,956
<BONDS>                                     39,651,335
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    28,201,753
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,533,846)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                77,043,444
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,250,769
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,370,318
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               278,745
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (840,804)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   286,571
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (554,233)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (554,233)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.11)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

DANIEL WILLS, Civil No. 6: 15-CV-O 1452-AA 

Plaintiff, 

v. JUDGlYIENT 

CAROLYN W. COL VIN, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

The Court has ordered that the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and the case is 

REMANDED to the Social Security Administration for fmiher proceedings. Judgment is 

entered for Plaintiff. 

Dated this 4- day ofrL----'F-"="1-----'' 2016. 

Submitted by: 

BILLY J. WILLIAMS, OSB #901366 

United States Attorney 

JANICE E. HEBERT, La. Bar #20218 

Assistant United States Attorney 

s/ John C. LaMont 

JOHN C. LALvIONT 

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 

of Attorneys for Defendant 

(206) 615-3703 

Page I JUDGlv!ENT - [6:15-CV-01452-AA] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 6:15-cv-01452-AA Document 17 Filed 06/14/16 Page 1 of 1
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

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 on Form 10-QSB of OmniComm Systems,
Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, being, Ronald T. Linares, Chief Financial Officer 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, 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 results of operations of
the Company.

/s/ Ronald T. Linares

Ronald T. Linares
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

August 14, 2003
PAGE 1 – ORDER 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

CHRISTIAN RUSSELL, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of 

Social Security, 

 Defendant. 

Case No. 2:14-cv-01908-AC 

ORDER

Michael H. Simon, District Judge.

United States Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation in 

this case on February 8, 2016. Dkt. 15. Judge Acosta recommended that the Court affirm the 

Commissioner’s decision denying the application of Plaintiff Christian Russell (“Plaintiff” or 

“Russell”) for Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. No 

party has filed objections. 

Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in 

whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1). If a party files objections to a magistrate’s findings and recommendations, “the court 
PAGE 2 – ORDER 

shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings 

or recommendations to which objection is made.” Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). 

If no party objects, the Act does not prescribe any standard of review. See Thomas v. Arn, 

474 U.S. 140, 152 (1985) (“There is no indication that Congress, in enacting [the Act], intended 

to require a district judge to review a magistrate’s report to which no objections are filed.”); 

United States. v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (holding that the 

court must review de novo magistrate’s findings and recommendations if objection is made, “but 

not otherwise”). 

Although review is not required in the absence of objections, the Act “does not preclude 

further review by the district judge[] sua sponte . . . under a de novo or any other standard.” 

Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. Indeed, the Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) 

recommend that “[w]hen no timely objection is filed,” the court review the magistrate’s findings 

and recommendations for “clear error on the face of the record.” 

No party having made objections, this Court follows the recommendation of the Advisory 

Committee and reviews Judge Acosta’s Findings and Recommendation for clear error on the 

face of the record. No such error is apparent. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Acosta’s 

Findings and Recommendation, Dkt. 15. The Commissioner’s decision is affirmed and the case 

is dismissed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this 29th day of February, 2016. 

 /s/ Michael H. Simon 

Michael H. Simon 

 United States District Judge
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
 Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research: Pullman, WA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Pullman, Washington Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research People & Locations







Sarah  Dohle
                        Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research

                        




                        
                        Geneticist
                        Phone: (509) 335-6898
                        
                        
                        Fax: (509) 335-6654(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)
                            ProjectsGenetic Resource and Information Management for Pulse, Temperate Forage Legume, Oilseed, Vegetable, Grasses, Sugar, Ornamental, and Other Crops
                                                    In-House Appropriated
                                                                    (D)Accession Number: 443951Facilitating Evaluation of Bean Common Mosaic Virus Isolates that Persist in NPGS Tepary Bean
                                                    Non-Assistance Cooperative Agreement
                                                                    (S)Accession Number: 444413


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
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
 Research Program Support: Ames, IA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Ames, Iowa National Animal Disease Center Research Program Support People & Locations







Joseph  Kadolph
                        Research Program Support

                        




                        
                        Maintenance Mechanic
                        Phone: (515) 357-7442
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
#### MERCANTILE TRUST CO., Appellant, v. ATLANTIC TRUST CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.

December 18, 1895.)

Action by the Mercantile Trust Company against the Atlantic Trust Company.

H. A. Taylor, for appellant.

J. L. Ward, for rdhpondent.

No opinion. Order to be entered reversing order appealed from unless defendant give security, to be fixed upon application to special term. See memorandum Per Curiam.
Document

Exhibit 10.2


CERTAIN INFORMATION, IDENTIFIED BY [*****], HAS BEEN EXCLUDED FROM THE EXHIBIT BECAUSE IT IS BOTH NOT MATERIAL AND WOULD LIKELY CAUSE COMPETITIVE HARM TO THE COMPANY IF PUBLICLY DISCLOSED.



AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 
AMENDED AND RESTATED LOAN ORIGINATION AGREEMENT


THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED LOAN ORIGINATION AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made effective as of February 21, 2020 (the “Effective Date”) by and between GreenSky, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company (“Servicer”), and Fifth Third Bank, National Association, an FDIC-insured federally chartered bank (“Lender”).  Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Loan Origination Agreement (as defined herein).


WITNESSETH:


WHEREAS, Lender and Servicer have previously entered into that certain Amended and Restated Loan Origination Agreement dated as of December 20, 2019 (the “Loan Origination Agreement”); 


WHEREAS, Lender and Servicer desire to amend the Loan Origination Agreement as set forth herein; 


NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Lender and Servicer hereby agree as follows:


1.Effective as of the Effective Date, the Loan Origination Agreement is hereby amended as follows:


a.Section 2.03 of the Loan Origination Agreement is hereby amended by the insertion of the following:


“[*****]”


b.  Schedule A-1 to the Loan Origination Agreement is hereby amended by inserting the following as a new subsection “C” under the heading “[*****]”:


“C.       [*****]”


c.  Schedule A-2 to the Loan Origination Agreement is hereby amended by inserting the following as a new subsection “B” under the heading “[*****]”:


“B.       [*****]”
















2.Except as expressly amended hereby, the Loan Origination Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


3.This Amendment may be executed and delivered by Lender and Servicer in facsimile or PDF format and in any number of separate counterparts, all of which, when delivered, shall together constitute one and the same document.
2







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.


SERVICER:


GREENSKY, LLC




By:      /s/ Timothy D. Kaliban                                               
Name: Timothy D. Kaliban                                                    
Title:   President                                                                     






LENDER:


FIFTH THIRD BANK, 
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION




By:      /s/ Ben Hoffman                                                         
Name: Ben Hoffman                                                              
Title:   Senior Vice President, Strategy                                  




By:      /s/ Bryan Preston                                                        
Name: Bryan Preston                                                             
Title:   Senior Vice President, Treasurer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tarias D. Williams, Appellant.

[942 NYS2d 845]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (David D. Egan, J.), rendered August 8, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [1]), defendant contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish that he intended to cause serious physical injury to the 66-year-old victim. We reject that contention. The victim and another witness testified at trial that defendant repeatedly punched the victim in the face while he was standing and after defendant had knocked him to the ground. Further, defendant struck the victim with sufficient force to cause a retrobulbar hemorrhage, as well as a fracture of the orbit, complete displacement of the lens and damage to the retina of the victim’s right eye, which resulted in permanent partial loss of vision. Defendant is “ ‘presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his actions’ ” *(People v Roman,*13 AD3d 1115, 1116 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 802 [2005]), and the natural and probable consequence of repeatedly punching a defenseless man in the face is that he will sustain a serious physical injury within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00 (10) *(see People v Meacham,*84 AD3d 1713, 1714 [2011], *lv denied*17 NY3d 808 [2011]; *People v Angelo M.,*231 AD2d 925, 925-926 [1996], *lv denied*89 NY2d 862 [1996], 89 NY2d 1087 [1997]).

The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Centra, J.P, Peradotto, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
# C_2006257EN.01001901.xml

| 25.10.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 257/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 257/19

---

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 9 October 2006

to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Banka Slovenije

(ECB/2006/14)

(2006/C 257/08)

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Eurosystem are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Eurosystem are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 1 of Council Decision 2006/495/EC of 11 July 2006 in accordance with Article 122(2) of the Treaty on the adoption by Slovenia of the single currency on 1 January 2007 (1), Slovenia now fulfils the necessary conditions for the adoption of the euro and the derogation in favour of Slovenia referred to in Article 4 of the 2003 Act of Accession (2) is abrogated with effect from 1 January 2007. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 1 of Council Decision 2006/495/EC of 11 July 2006 in accordance with Article 122(2) of the Treaty on the adoption by Slovenia of the single currency on 1 January 2007 (1), Slovenia now fulfils the necessary conditions for the adoption of the euro and the derogation in favour of Slovenia referred to in Article 4 of the 2003 Act of Accession (2) is abrogated with effect from 1 January 2007.

1

2

| (3) | The external auditors recommended herein are Banka Slovenije's current auditors, who were appointed for the financial years 2006 to 2008, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The external auditors recommended herein are Banka Slovenije's current auditors, who were appointed for the financial years 2006 to 2008,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Deloitte & Touche revizija d.o.o. should be appointed as the external auditors of Banka Slovenije for the financial years 2007 and 2008.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 9 October 2006.

The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude TRICHET

---

(1)  OJ L 195, 15.7.2006, p. 25.

1

(2)  OJ L 236, 23.9.2003, p. 33.

2

---
#### MYERS v. POLHEMUS.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

September 14, 1896.)

Action by John R. Myers against Josephine Polhemus.

No opinion. Motion denied, without prejudice to a renewal in case no appeal is taken to the court of appeals, or in case judgment is affirmed by that court. See 38 N. Y. S. 1147.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A1236. CASEY W. MARTIN v. THE STATE.

Casey W. Martin filed this direct appeal from the trial court’s order denying a

pro se motion to modify sentence. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

In construing pleadings, substance controls over nomenclature. See Kuriatnyk

v. Kuriatnyk, 286 Ga. 589, 590 (690 SE2d 397) (2010). Here, although titled a

“Motion to Modify Sentence,” Martin’s motion alleged that the trial court improperly

revoked his first offender probation. Because the underlying subject matter of appeal

is the revocation of Martin’s “first offender” probation, Martin was required to file

an application for discretionary appeal in order to obtain review in this Court. See

OCGA § 5-6- 35 (a) (5); Jones v. State, 322 Ga. App. 269 n. 2 (745 SE2d 1) (2013);

Zamora v. State, 226 Ga. App. 105 (485 SE2d 214) (1997). His failure to do so

deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/11/2016

April 11, 2016