alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Cite as State v. Alsup, 128 Ohio St.3d 340, 2011-Ohio-227.] 

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. ALSUP, APPELLEE. 

[Cite as State v. Alsup, 128 Ohio St.3d 340, 2011-Ohio-227.] 

Discretionary appeal accepted, judgment of the court of appeals vacated, and 

cause remanded to the court of appeals for application of State v. 

Johnson. 

(No. 2010-1748 — Submitted January 4, 2011 — Decided January 25, 2011.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No. 23641, 

2010-Ohio-4038. 

__________________ 

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted. 

{¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals is vacated on the authority of 

State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153, 2010-Ohio-6314, 942 N.E.2d 1061, and the 

cause is remanded to the court of appeals for application of our decision in State 

v. Johnson. 

 O’CONNOR, C.J., and LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, CUPP, and 

MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 

 PFEIFER and LANZINGER, JJ., dissent and would not accept the 

discretionary appeal. 

__________________ 

Mathias H. Heck Jr., Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and R. 

Lynn Nothstine, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant. 

__________________
#### PEOPLE v. GOLDFOGLE.

(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.

June 15, 1894.)

Action by the people against Henry M. Goldfogle.

No ■opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
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 annual report on Form 10-Q of Tier Technologies, Inc., (the “Company”), for the period ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Ronald W. Johnston, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to his knowledge:







1.
This Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




2.
The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:  February 7, 2011
/s/ Ronald W. JohnstonRonald W. JohnstonChief Financial Officer
#### George T. Smalley et al., Respondents, v City of Poughkeepsie et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), entered June 2, 1986, which denied their motion to strike the plaintiffs’ note of issue.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the motion is granted.

The plaintiffs originally filed a note of issue indicating that they did not want to have a jury trial. Thereafter, they moved for leave to amend their note of issue so as to demand a jury trial. That motion was denied. They did not seek renewal or reargument nor did they appeal from that order. Instead, they *622withdrew their original note of issue and, before pretrial disclosure was completed, filed a new note of issue, demanding a jury trial, and stating that disclosure had been completed. The defendants moved to strike the second note of issue, and that motion was denied. This appeal ensued.

The plaintiffs’ only response to the defendants’ arguments on appeal is that the denial of the motion to strike the second note of issue was made by the Justice to whom this case had been assigned under the Individual Assignment System, and that we must defer to her. However, in light of the denial of the plaintiffs’ prior motion to amend their first note of issue, and their failure to appeal therefrom, allowing the second note of issue to stand would be inappropriate. Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-1151
BAYUSH MEHARI, Petitioner, versus U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A29-919-149) Submitted: August 5, 1997 Decided: August 27, 1997 Before HALL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard S. Bromberg, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, William J. Howard, Senior Litigation Counsel, Madeline Henley, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant Bayush Mehari seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' opinion and order dismissing her appeal and affirmingas modified the immigration judge's decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of deportation. Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based on substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Mehari v. INS , No. A29-919-149 (B.I.A. Jan. 8, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

July 8, 2022

No. 04

- 21

- 00360

- CR

Kevin Jason GONZALES, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texa s, Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020CR0029 Honorable Michael E. Mery , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

After we granted Appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file the brief since his last substitution of counsel

, A ppellant’s brief was due on July 5, 2022

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a). On the extended due date

, Appellant filed a motion for extension , requesting an additional thirty days to file the brief

. Appellant’s motion is granted ; Appellant’s brief is due on August 4, 2022

. Any further motion for extension of time to file Appellant’s brief is discouraged

.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 8th day of July, 2022

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
Exhibit








EXHIBIT 10.37




Effective March 25, 2019, TVA and Jeffrey J. Lyash acknowledged that the offer letter to Mr. Lyash approved as of February 14, 2019 (the Offer Letter), contained a typographical error and that Mr. Lyash is entitled to sick leave accrued at the rate of four hours per pay period rather than six hours per pay period as indicated in the Offer Letter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,347
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     25,012
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               134,676
<PP&E>                                         299,251
<DEPRECIATION>                                 110,723
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 354,229
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,715
<BONDS>                                        320,504
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (124,199)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   354,229
<SALES>                                        129,275
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               129,275
<CGS>                                          120,325
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  130,885
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   190
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (4,438)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,222
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,022)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,022)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### PEOPLE v. MAYO.

(Supreme Court. General Term, Fifth Department.

January 18, 1894.)

Prosecution against Philip Mayo.

No opinion. Motion to amend decision so as to certify that the reversal was upon the law, etc., denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                   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

I, John F. Welch, Chief Executive Officer of CNA Surety Corporation (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period
    ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
    of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
    78m or 78o(d)); 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/John F. Welch
----------------------------

John F. Welch
Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6350 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6350

To amend title XIX of the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the 
      program under such title relating to lifespan respite care.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 29, 2010

 Mr. Langevin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XIX of the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the 
      program under such title relating to lifespan respite care.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lifespan Respite Care 
Reauthorization Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF LIFESPAN RESPITE CARE PROGRAM.

    Section 2905 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ii-4) 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting a semicolon; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(6) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
            ``(7) such sums as may be necessary for each subsequent 
        fiscal year.''.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### National Park Service

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the National Park Service Concessions Management Improvement Act of 1998, notice is hereby given that the National Park Service intends to issue a temporary concession contract authorizing continued operation of food and beverage, overnight lodging and merchandise services to the public within Oregon Caves National Monument. The temporary concession contract will be for a term of not more than one year. This short-term concession contract is necessary to avoid interruption of visitor services while the National Park Service finalizes the development of the Prospectus to be issued for a long-term concession contract. This short-term contract will be for a one seasonal operating period ending November 30, 2001. This notice is in pursuant to 36 CFR Part 51, Section 51.24(a).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The concession contract at Oregon Caves National Monument expired on December 31, 2001. The operation is seasonal and operates primarily from mid-May through mid-September and provides visitors with lodging, food and beverage and merchandises services. Oregon Caves National Monument is near completion of a Prospectus for the solicitation of a long-term concession contract that meets the requirements of the park's General Management Plan regarding commercial services offered to the public. The short-term concession contract will allow for this action to take place without a long-term delay in service to the public.

Information about this place can be sought from: National Park Service, Chief, Concession Program Management Office, Pacific West Region, Attn: Mr. Tony Sisto, 600 Harrison Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, California 94107-1372, or call (415) 427-1366.

Dated: January 22, 2001.

John J. Reynolds,

Regional Director, Pacific West Region.

[FR Doc. 01-10404  Filed 4-25-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-70-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

       
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE-MONTH PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL 
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>


<S>                                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                   JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                              0
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     82,801
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 102,336
<PP&E>                                                           418,495
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   (47,669)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   812,687
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            572,061
<BONDS>                                                          108,736
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                       1,749,786
<OTHER-SE>                                                    (1,562,896)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     812,687
<SALES>                                                          430,143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 430,143
<CGS>                                                            638,733
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    638,733
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 340,857
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                25,728
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 (575,175)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                             (575,175)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                    (575,175)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                      (.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      (.30)
        

</TABLE>
Home Assessment T ool

Escape barriers observed: 

Windows nailed or painted shut

Furniture or boxes blocking exit doors 

Security bars on doors and/or windows

Clutter hindering escape route

Other: 

Home ownership status: 

Resident owns home

Resident lives in home occupied by owner 

or owned by family member 

Resident rents home

Number of people living in home:

Other area: 

Look for smoke alarms:

• On every level of the home 

• Directly outside of every sleeping area

Alarm Status

AM (alarm missing)

NLB (non-lithium or unknown battery)

NWL (nonworking lithium alarm)

>10 (working lithium alarm more than 10 years old) 

<10 (working lithium alarm less than 10 years old)

Outside of sleeping area #1

Indicate level of home:

Outside of sleeping area #2

Indicate level of home:

Outside of sleeping area #3

Indicate level of home:

Additional level of home without a sleeping area 

Indicate level of home:

Additional level of home without a sleeping area 

Indicate level of home:

Total # of new alarms needed: 

(AM + NLB + NWL + >10): 

Fire Safe Seniors

Date: Assessor:

Name:

Address: Zip:

Phone: ( ) GENDER: M F Date of Birth: 

ETHNICITY (Circle one): African American Asian/Pacific Islander Hispanic Native American 

Non-Hispanic White Other:

/ /

/ /

U.S. Fire Administration
LOOK FOR SMOKE ALARMS IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS:

• On every level of the home, including the basement

• Directly outside of every sleeping area

THE FOLLOWING ALARMS SHOULD BE REPLACED:

• Non-lithium battery alarms

• Alarms with unknown battery types

• Nonworking lithium alarms

• Alarms more than 10 years old

Consent/waiver form signed by client:

Date alarm(s) installed: 

Fire Department (if applicable): 

Date alarm(s) tested:

Alarm(s) tested by:

Action Needed: Smoke alarm installation

/ /

/ /

/ /

Fire Safe Seniors
#### William Dugan, Appellant, v Kenneth Glass et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

In a medical malpractice action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated December 18, 1985, as, upon reargument, adhered to its prior determination in an order of the same court, dated October 11, 1985, which granted a motion by the defendants Glass and Goodman for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff failed to demonstrate a meritorious cause of action and a reasonable excuse for failing to comply with two conditional orders of preclusion. Accordingly, the Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion by granting summary judgment in favor of the respondents dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them *(see, Bailey v North Shore Univ. Hosp.,*91 AD2d 967, *affd*59 NY2d 748; *see also, Sigurdsson v Long Is. Jewish Hillside Med. Center,*114 AD2d 497; *Crescenzo v McCabe Powers Body Co.,*110 AD2d 619, *lv dismissed*65 NY2d 605, 923; *Gass v Gass,*101 AD2d 849). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6399 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.6399

                      One Hundred Eleventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten

                                 An Act

 
   To improve certain administrative operations of the Office of the 
            Architect of the Capitol, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CONSOLIDATION OF STAFF POSITIONS.
    (a) Consolidation.--Section 108 of the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations Act, 1991 (2 U.S.C. 1849) is amended to read as follows:
    ``Sec. 108.  The Architect of the Capitol may fix the rate of basic 
pay for not more than 32 positions at a rate not to exceed the highest 
total rate of pay for the Senior Executive Service under subchapter 
VIII of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, for the locality 
involved.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1203(e) of the Legislative 
Branch Appropriations Act, 2003 (2 U.S.C. 1805(e)) is amended by 
striking paragraph (3).
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to pay periods beginning on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO ACQUIRE BUILDING.
    (a) Availability.--The amounts described in subsection (b) shall be 
available to the Architect of the Capitol for the acquisition (through 
purchase, lease, transfer from another Federal entity, or otherwise) of 
real property for the use of the Capitol Police.
    (b) Amounts Described.--The amounts described in this subsection 
are amounts appropriated to, and remaining available for obligation by, 
the Architect of the Capitol under the heading ``Architect of the 
Capitol, Capitol Police Buildings and Grounds'' or under the heading 
``Architect of the Capitol, Capitol Police Buildings, Grounds and 
Security'' in any Act making appropriations for the legislative branch 
for fiscal years 2007 through 2010.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```