alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BANHAM v. ROBERTS et al.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

May 14, 1894.)

Mechanics’ Liens—Payment to Contractor in Advance.

Where the owner of a building pays the contract price to the contractor before it is due, such paj^ment does not defeat the right to mechanics’ liens, though it was made before notices of liens were filed.

Appeal from judgment on report of referee.

Action by Charles W. Banham against Mary A. Roberts and others to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff and of defendants Odell, defendant Mary A. Roberts appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before BROWN, P. J., and DYKMAN and PRATT, JJ.

W. H. H. Ely, for appellant.

Purdy & Squire, for respondent Banham.

Yale & Davison, for respondents Odell.

DYKMAN, J.

This is an action for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien. It was tried before a referee to hear and determine, and he decided in favor of both the claimants; one of the defendants being a lienor, or • holder of a lien. The owner has appealed from the order confirming the referee’s report, and also from the judgment entered thereon.' The plaintiff filed two notices of lien upon the property, one of which he assigned to the defendants the Odells, and upon the other commenced this action. The Odells and Turner, the original contractor, were brought in as defendants after the commencement of the action. It seems the owner had paid a sum equal to the contract price for the building before the notices of liens were" filed, but it also appears that the *829payments under the contract were anticipated; and, by the provisions of the act under which this action is prosecuted, payments made in advance of the terms of the contract cannot operate to the prejudice of the lienors. Laws 1885, c. 343, § 2; Cheney v. Association, 65 N. Y. 282; Post v. Campbell, 83 N. Y. 282. If the owner shall be obliged to pay beyond the contract price in this case, such obligation is the result of her indiscretion in making payments in advance of the terms of the contract. It is claimed by the appellant that some of the work is not the subject of a lien, under the provisions of the mechanic’s lien law, but we think it all falls within the term “appurtenances.”

Much complaint is made respecting the well, but the evidence discloses no abuse or overcharge. Eock was struck at the depth of 7 feet, and at 18 feet water was reached. After that the well was sunk deeper, to make a reservoir; and, as the powerful explosives employed tore out a space unnecessarily large, it was decided to buüd it up with brick from bottom to top. That was done, and rubble masonry filled in back of the brick. There was no overcharge, and the claim under both liens was meritorious. The record discloses no error, and the judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.
Exhibit 99.5  SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION  I,
Pierre Rivard, certify that:  1.I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Hydrogenics Corporation;  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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;  4.The company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 company 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 company, 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 companys disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and  (c)Disclosed
in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys
internal control over financial reporting; and  5.The companys other certifying officer and I
have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the
company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 company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 companys internal control over financial
reporting.   Date:  March 31, 2005  /s/ Pierre RivardPierre RivardPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Director
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Nery Saud CHACON, Appellant.

No. 11-1869.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Sept. 7, 2011.

Filed: Sept. 14, 2011.

*661Teresa Baumann, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, Kevin Craig Fletcher, I, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Sioux City, IA, for Appellee.

Nery Saud Chacon, Beaumont, TX, pro se.

John P. Messina, Assistant, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Appellant.

Before LOKEN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Nery Chacon pleaded guilty to illegally re-entering the United States after being deported following the commission of an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1826(a), (b)(2). The district court1 imposed a sentence of 46 months in prison and three years of supervised release. Chacon appeals. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), he argues that the district court abused its discretion in imposing a substantively unreasonable sentence that was greater than necessary to achieve the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Chacon has failed to rebut the presumption that his sentence, which falls at the bottom of the advisory Guidelines range, is not substantively unreasonable. *See Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); *United States v. Feemster,*572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Additionally, having reviewed the record under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
475 F.2d 1280

#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Errol ZEIGER.

No. 72-2065.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Nov. 9, 1972.

Before McGOWAN, MacKINNON and ROBB, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on for consideration of an appeal under 23 D.C.Code § 104(d) from an order of the District Court, 350 F.Supp. 685, dated November 7, 1972, which admitted proffered polygraph testimony, and the Court heard argument of counsel.

On consideration of the foregoing, and of the record on appeal herein, it is

Ordered by the Court that the order of the District Court appealed from in this cause is hereby reversed and this case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings.
Exhibit 32.2

                           INTRAOP MEDICAL CORPORATION

                            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 Annual Report of Intraop Medical Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Howard
Solovei, 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/   J.K. Hullett
                                                     --------------------------
                                                      J.K. Hullett
                                                      Chief Financial Officer

                                                      Date:  December 22, 2008

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Intraop Medical Corporation and will be retained by Intraop Medical
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
Exhibit 12.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Hannu Ryöppönen, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Stora Enso Oyj;
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------



|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; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 21, 2006



/s/ HANNU RYÖPPÖNENHannu RyöppönenChief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-125167, 333-127102, 333-145302 and333-145303 on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 27, 2009 (which reports expressed an unqualified opinion and included an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158,*Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans*, as of December 31, 2006), relating to the financial statements of Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”), andthe effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008. 

 

/s/    Deloitte & Touche LLP 

 

Des Moines, Iowa 

February 27, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          28,262
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,112
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,439
<PP&E>                                         203,181
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,374
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 246,594
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,227
<BONDS>                                         23,248
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           182
<OTHER-SE>                                     180,050
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   246,594
<SALES>                                         23,962
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,962
<CGS>                                           21,145
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,145
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 367
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,032
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,275
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,757
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,757
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10
        

</TABLE>
CMF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0157

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JACQUELINE BLACK,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time 

to and including September 14, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 11 2020

08/11/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0157
#### Woodward Iron Co v. Hook, *pro ami.*

Appeal .from Birmingham City Court.

Tried before the Hon. W. W. Wilkerson.

James E. Webb, for appellant.

Gregg & Thornton, for appellee.

Opinion by

McClellan, C. J.

This was an action brought by the appellee against the appellant, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff while in the employment of the defendant, which injuries were alleged to have been caused by reason of the defendant’s negligence. The plaintiff sued for $20,000 damages, and from a judgment awarding him $3,000 as damages, the defendant appeals.

The judgment is affirmed.
Eligible to Naturalize Fact Sheet: 

Durham-Chapel Hill, NC 

Data Source: Office of Homeland Security Statistics 

12,300 Eligible to Naturalize Created March 2024 

This fact sheet provides information on select characteristics of people with Lawful Permanent Residence (LPR) status, also known 

as Green Card holders. Generally, an LPR is eligible to become a naturalized U.S. citizen after meeting certain requirements.

Providing more information on the eligible to naturalize population is in keeping with the Executive Order on Restoring Faith in Our 

Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans (E.O. 14012). 

Throughout our history, the United States has welcomed immigrants from all over the world who have helped shape and define our 

country. Granting citizenship to eligible lawful permanent residents is vital to our nation’s security, economic prosperity, and a future 

built on the principles of the U.S. Constitution. Some of the benefits to becoming a U.S. citizen include the right to vote, traveling 

with a U.S. passport, bringing family members to the U.S., applying for federal jobs, and becoming an elected official. 

Top Countries of Birth 

Mexico 

1,580 

China, People’s Republic 

1,080 

Burma 

610 

Iraq 

220 

Kenya 

210 

Thailand 

200 

Number of Years in LPR Status 

Generally, a Lawful Permanent 

Resident (or LPR) is eligible to 

become a naturalized U.S. 

citizen after meeting certain 

requirements such as length of 

time in LPR status; the length 

of time depends on the class of 

admission they were given as 

an LPR. 

1,620 1,600 

1,410 1,430 

1,220 1,250 1,190 

1,360 

570 

330 320 

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 

Number of Years in LPR Status 
 

LPRs by Category of Admission 

After meeting 

certain eligibility 

requirements, a 

person can gain 

LPR status through 

employment, family 

relationships, the 

diversity visa 

program, or as a 

refugee or asylee, 

among other ways. 

<1

Other 

0 4

Dive

2

rsi

0 

ty 

1,970 

Refugees and Asylees 

1,130 

Family-sponsored 

preferences 

5,860 

Immediate relatives 

of U.S. citizens 

2,390 

Employment-based preferences 

Concentration of Eligible to Naturalize in the Region 

65% of the eligible to naturalize population 

resides in one county. 

7,620 Durham County, NC 

3,770 Orange County, NC 

410 Chatham County, NC 

<10 Granville County, NC 

<10 Person County, NC 

Eligible to Naturalize by Age 

75 and Over <10 

60-74 <10 

50-59 1,790 

40-49 1,950 

30-39 3,220 

20-29 1,800 

15-19 <10 

Eligible to Naturalize by Gender 

53% 

of persons 

eligible 

were 

Female 

47% 

of persons 

eligible 

were Male 

1. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Numbers may not sum to totals due to rounding.
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6012 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 

review utilization of diabetes screening benefits and make 

recommendations on outreach programs with respect to 

such benefits, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 6012 EH

1 SECTION 1. DIABETES SCREENING EVALUATION AND OUT2 REACH PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS. 

3 Part P of title III of the Public Health Service Act 

4 (42 U.S.C. 280g et seq.) is amended by inserting after 

5 section 399V–3 the following new section: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 399V–3A. DIABETES SCREENING EVALUATION AND 

7 OUTREACH PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS. 

8 ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—With respect to diabetes 

9 screening tests and for the purposes of reducing the num10 ber of undiagnosed seniors with diabetes or prediabetes, 

11 the Secretary shall— 

12 ‘‘(1) review utilization of diabetes screening 

13 benefits under programs of the Department of 

14 Health and Human Services to identify and address 

15 any existing problems with regard to such utilization 

16 and related data collection mechanisms; and 

17 ‘‘(2) make recommendations (informed by the 

18 review under paragraph (1)) on outreach activities 

19 being carried out by the Secretary as of the date of 

20 the enactment of this section to ensure awareness 

21 among seniors and health care providers of— 

22 ‘‘(A) such diabetes screening benefits; and 

23 ‘‘(B) the advantages of knowing one’s dia24 betic or prediabetic status for the purpose of di25 abetes self management. 
3 

•HR 6012 EH

1 ‘‘(b) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall carry out 

2 this section in consultation with— 

3 ‘‘(1) the heads of appropriate health agencies 

4 and offices in the Department of Health and Human 

5 Services; and 

6 ‘‘(2) entities with an interest in diabetes, in7 cluding industry, voluntary health organizations 

8 (such as diabetes advocacy groups and other related 

9 stakeholders), trade associations, and professional 

10 societies. 

11 ‘‘(c) REPORT.—For each of the fiscal years 2011, 

12 2012, and 2013, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 

13 an annual report on the activities carried out under this 

14 section during such respective year. 

15 ‘‘(d) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the 

16 term ‘senior’ means an individual who is at least 65 years 

17 of age.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6012 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human 

and for other purposes. reach programs with respect to such benefits, ing benefits and make recommendations on outServices to review utilization of diabetes screen-
Exhibit 31.2



Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)



I, Vincent C. Klinges, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Logility, 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, 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 registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(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 the registrants board of directors:



(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: December 12, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ Vincent C. Klinges                    
|                        |  |     |  | Vincent C. Klinges Chief Financial
Officer