alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Marcia G. Bryndle, Appellant, v Joseph J. Knab, Appellant, and Thomas E. Knapp, Respondent.

[947 NYS2d 351]

*1686Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Patrick H. NeMoyer, J.), entered April 18, 2011 in a personal injury action. The order, among other things, granted the motion of defendant Thomas E. Knapp for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the complaint against him.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she allegedly sustained when the vehicle driven by defendant Joseph J. Knab rear-ended the vehicle driven by plaintiff, causing plaintiffs vehicle to make contact with the vehicle driven by defendant Thomas E. Knapp. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was attempting to turn into a driveway that served as the entrance and exit to a parking lot. Knapp was attempting to exit the parking lot using the same driveway. According to plaintiff, she was unable to turn into the driveway because Knapp’s vehicle was in the center of the driveway, whereupon the vehicle driven by Knab rear-ended plaintiffs vehicle while plaintiff was either coasting or had fully stopped.

We conclude that Supreme Court properly granted the motion of Knapp for summary judgment seeking, inter alia, dismissal of the complaint against him, but our reasoning differs from that of the court. Knapp established as a matter of law that he was not negligent, and both plaintiff and Knab failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see generally Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). “The fact that [Knapp] positioned his motor vehicle in the middle of the driveway does not raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the accident was caused by negligence on his part” *(Bous v Fahey,*250 AD2d 638 [1998]). Present — Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Carni, Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.
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
 Dairy Forage Research: Madison, WI
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Madison, Wisconsin U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center Dairy Forage Research People





- Find a Person
- Find a Location
- ARS Organization Chart
- People
- Diane Amundson
- KC Cifizzari
- Emily Diaz Vallejo
- Alison Duff
- Jose Franco
- Elizabeth French
- John Grabber
- Rebecca Heidelberger
- Kenneth Kalscheur
- Lisa Kissing Kucek
- Elizabeth Matejczyk
- Kristine Niemann
- Priyanka Patel
- Vii Pszczolkowski
- John Raasch
- Jim Richmond
- Heathcliffe Riday
- Michelle Schwab
- Neal Tilhou
- Matthew Volenec

Priyanka  Patel    Agricultural Engineer /ARSUserFiles/58012/Patel photo 2023.jpeg
 Priyanka PatelAgricultural Engineer 608-216-3310 1925 Linden Dr. W Madison, WI 53706 Dairy Forage Research


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
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1845 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1845

           To suspend temporarily the duty on Tinopal CBS-X.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 24, 1998

   Mr. Helms introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To suspend temporarily the duty on Tinopal CBS-X.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:
      

``     9902.32.04      Benzene sulfonic                                                                         
                        acid,2,2-((1,1-                                                                         
                        biphenyl)-4,4-                                                                          
                        diyldi-2.1-                                                                             
                        ethenediyl)bis-                                                                         
                        disodium salt                                                                           
                        (CAS No. 27344-41-                                                                      
                        8) (provided for                                                                        
                        in subheading                                                                           
                        3204.20.80)......  Free         No change         No change         On or before 12/    
                                                                                             31/2000            
                                                                                                              ''

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies to 
articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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
 Food and Feed Safety Research: New Orleans, LA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area New Orleans, Louisiana Southern Regional Research Center Food and Feed Safety Research Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Collaborations The Food and Feed Safety Research has a long and productive history of collaborative research involving stakeholders.  Current collaborators and projects:  Probing Chromosome Structure to Activate Silent Metabolite Gene Clusters  Soil Microbiome to Control Aflatoxin and Field Evaluation of Transgenic Corn Genes and Genetic Networks Underlying Resistance to Aspergillus flavus In Corn  Development of Rapid, Non-Destructive Hyperspectral Imaging Methodology to Detect, and Quantify Fungal Growth and Aflatoxin Contamination  Identification and Characterization of Regulatory Genes in A. flavus that are Involved in Development, Secondary Metabolism and Virulence  Evaluate the Role of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Plant-Fungal Interactions, especially Corn-Aspergillus Interaction  Modeling to Forecast Mycotoxin Breakout in U.S.-Grown Maize  Generating Input Features for Modeling Mycotoxin Outbreaks in the USA


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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,237,684
<SECURITIES>                                22,497,334
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,684,401
<ALLOWANCES>                                   215,000
<INVENTORY>                                 19,647,514
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            52,197,323
<PP&E>                                       2,026,455
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,179,247
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              53,435,648
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,474,650
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       175,568
<OTHER-SE>                                  51,785,412
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                53,435,648
<SALES>                                      3,444,650
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,444,650
<CGS>                                        2,172,088
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,172,088
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               695,523
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                577,039
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            577,039
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   577,039
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03



</TABLE>
Exhibit
31.2




I,
Stephen P. Kuchen, certify that:




1.          I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PacificHealth Laboratories,
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 officer 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)) 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 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 registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in the 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




(c)          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 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 of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):




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 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: May
6, 2009


/s/
      Stephen P. KuchenStephen
      P. Kuchen, Chief Financial
Officer
[No. 10440.

Department One.

December 26, 1912.]

#### Methow Canal Company, *Respondent,*v. J. C. Barton, *Appellant.**1*

Appeal — Decisions Reviewable — Finality — Striking Defense. An order striking parts of an affirmative defense but leaving an issue to be tried, is not appealable, since tbe order did not determine tbe action or prevent a final judgment, within tbe meaning of Rem. & Bal. Code, §1716 authorizing appeals.

Appeal from an order of the superior court for Okanogan county, Pendergast, J., entered March 6, 1912, striking parts of defendant’s cross-complaint, after a hearing before the court.

Dismissed.

*C. F. Burton*and *E. C. Jennings,*for appellant.

*Smith*& *Gresham,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 128 Pac. 627.

Chadwick, J.

Appellant filed a lien in the sum of $360, against certain property belonging to respondent situate in Okanogan county. Thereafter respondent began this action, setting up its ownership of the lands charged with the lien; that the amount claimed was not due; that the claim was exorbitant and unjust, and that the lien had been filed for the purpose of embarrassing respondent in the sale of its property; and praying for an order permitting it to pay into the registry of the court an amount sufficient to protect any judgment that might thereafter be rendered, and further, that the cloud upon the real property be removed. Upon citation to show cause, the court ordered and adjudged that respondent be permitted to pay into the registry of the court the sum of $720; that upon so doing, the appellant’s lien should be canceled “as to the property and things mentioned and described in said claim of lien, and that said claim of lien be transferred to said deposit, and that said deposit shall be and remain as a substitute for the property men*402tioned in defendant’s said claim of lien.” Appellant, by his counsel, took exceptions to this order. Thereafter he answered, and by way of affirmative answer and defense, set up his lien upon the property described therein, and asked for foreclosure. Upon motion by respondent, the court struck practically all of the affirmative answer, stripping the issue down to the question of debt only. To this order, exceptions were also taken, and this appeal is prosecuted from the last mentioned order.

A motion is made to dismiss the appeal. This must be sustained. The question of debt is still before the óourt upon the complaint and answer, and so long as it is, this court will not inquire into the right of the appellant to set up and foreclose his lien. An action cannot be split for the purpose of appeal. The question now submitted to this court may be determined if the case is ever brought here on its merits. The order sustaining the motion to strike did not determine or discontinue the action, nor does it prevent a final judgment. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 1716.

The appeal is premature and is dismissed.

Mount, C. J., Gose, Parker, and Crow, JJ., concur.
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 40922

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

EMILY McGARRY,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 776

Filed: December 6, 2013

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Bannock County. Hon. Robert C. Naftz, District Judge. 

Order relinquishing jurisdiction, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Erik R. Lehtinen, Chief, 

Appellate Unit, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy 

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and GRATTON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Emily McGarry was convicted of possession of methamphetamine, Idaho Code § 37-

2732(c)(1). The district court originally sentenced McGarry to a unified term of seven years 

with three years determinate, to run concurrently with a sentence in an unrelated case, and 

retained jurisdiction. At the conclusion of the retained jurisdiction program, the district court 

relinquished jurisdiction but reduced McGarry’s sentence to five years with two years 

determinate. McGarry filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reduction of sentence. The 

district court granted the motion, further reducing McGarry’s sentence to three years with one 

year determinate. McGarry appeals the district court’s decision to relinquish jurisdiction.
2

The decision as to whether to place a defendant on probation or, instead, to relinquish 

jurisdiction is committed to the discretion of the sentencing court. State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 

205-06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). It follows that a decision to relinquish 

jurisdiction will not be disturbed on appeal except for an abuse of discretion. State v. Chapman, 

120 Idaho 466, 472, 816 P.2d 1023, 1029 (Ct. App. 1991). Idaho Code § 19-2521 sets out the 

criteria a court must consider when deciding whether to grant probation or impose imprisonment. 

A decision to deny probation will not be held to represent an abuse of discretion if the decision is 

consistent with the Section 19-2521 standards. State v. Merwin, 131 Idaho 642, 962 P.2d 1026 

(1998). The record in this case shows that the district court properly considered the information 

before it and determined that probation was not appropriate. Therefore, we hold that the district 

court did not abuse its discretion. 

The order relinquishing jurisdiction is affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON

CYNTHIA A. WISEMAN,

Plaintiff,

v. 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-01432-KI

JUDGMENT

Lisa R.J. Porter

JP Law PC

5200 SW Meadows Rd., Ste. 150

Lake Oswego, OR 97035

Attorney for Plaintiff

Billy J. Williams

Acting United States Attorney

District of Oregon

Page 1 - JUDGMENT

Case 3:14-cv-01432-KI Document 22 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 2
Ronald K. Silver

Assistant United States Attorney

1000 SW Third Ave., Ste. 600

Portland, OR 97201-2902

Daphne Banay

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Office of the General Counsel

Social Security Administration

701 Fifth Ave., Ste. 2900 M/S 221A

Seattle, WA 98104-7075

Attorneys for Defendant

KING, Judge:

Based on the record, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the

Commissioner is affirmed and this case is dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 28th day of July, 2015. 

 /s/ Garr M. King 

Garr M. King

United States District Judge

Page 2 - JUDGMENT

Case 3:14-cv-01432-KI Document 22 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         426,335
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,696,669
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (823,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  8,893,228
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,166,845
<PP&E>                                      15,609,218
<DEPRECIATION>                             (6,519,320)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              31,851,690
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,173,380
<BONDS>                                      3,118,222
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    25,877,731
<OTHER-SE>                                (15,317,643)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                31,759,213
<SALES>                                     11,936,290
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,936,290
<CGS>                                        8,075,863
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,415,781
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (40,600)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             372,956
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (504,264)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (504,264)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (504,264)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)


</TABLE>