alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EifrILIPPEMAN 

-u 

LER 

Douglas Gibbon's 

Ro -,,,240L3 (0) 1947A artedx, 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

ANNA CHERUBINI, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

Respondent. 

No. 70562 

FILED 

JUL 0 7 2016 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order affirming a 

conviction from the justice court. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark 

County; Rob Bare, Judge. 

Our review of this appeal reveals a jurisdictional defect. 

Specifically, appellant's case arose in the justice court. The district court 

has final appellate jurisdiction over a case arising in the justice court. 

Nev. Const. art. 6, § 6; Tripp a. City of Sparks, 92 Nev. 362, 363, 550 P.2d 

419, 419 (1976). Accordingly, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to 

consider this appeal, and we 

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 
cc: Hon. Rob Bare, District Judge 

• Anna Cherubini 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(Op 1947A 491/bVP 

2
#### *In re*HAYS, Leonard Keith Jr.

(MR 21050)

Monticello, IL

Order of the Court:

The petition by the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission for leave to file exceptions to the report and recommendation of the Review Board is denied. Respondent Leonard Keith Hays, Jr., is suspended from the practice of law for one year, as recommended by the Review Board. Suspension effective October 12, 2006. Respondent Leonard Keith Hays, Jr., shall reimburse the Client Protection Program Trust Fund for any Client Protection payments arising from his conduct prior to the termination of the period of suspension.

Thomas, C.J., and Garman, J., dissenting.

Chief Justice Thomas and Justice Garman would suspend respondent from the practice of law for two years.
Exhibit 99.2



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 of i3 Mobile,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Edward J. Fletcher, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.



|                                          
|------------------------------------------
|/s/    EDWARD J. FLETCHER                 
|Edward J. Fletcher Chief Financial Officer

May 14, 2003



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
HYNES & HOWES INSURANCE COUNSELORS, INC.
                          Notes to Financial Statements
                           September 30, 1996 and 1995



Note 2.  Indeterminable Value of Investments in Affiliated Companies

         Basis for carrying value of these investments is detailed in Note 5 of
         this report.  However, these values may be substantially affected by
         the operations of affiliated companies in whom the company has direct
         or indirect investments.  Future interco mpany transactions may also
         affect the value of these investments.

Note 3.  Sale of Agencies

         At December 31, 1979, the Company owned three insurance agencies, two
         of the agencies were sold during the year ended September 30, 1980, and
         the other agency was sold during the year ended September 30, 1981.
         The equity in the two agencies sold dur ing 1980 was $47,896 at the
         date of sale.  The sale price was $163,000 resulting in a gain to the
         Company of $115,104 (See Note 4A), the equity in the agency sold during
         1981 was $146,542 at the date of sale.  The sale price was $226,936
         resulting in a gain to the Company of $80,394.  (See Note 4A)
EifrIL IPP E MAN

- u LER

Douglas Gibbon's 

# Ro -,,,240L3 (0) 1947A artedx, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ANNA CHERUBINI, Appellant,

vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent. No. 70562



# FILED JUL 0 7 2016 ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is a pro se appeal from a district court order affirming a conviction from the justice court. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Rob Bare, Judge.

Our review of this appeal reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, appellant's case arose in the justice court. The district court has final appellate jurisdiction over a case arising in the justice court. Nev. Const. art. 6, § 6; 

### Tripp a. City of Sparks, 92 Nev. 362, 363, 550 P.2d 419, 419 (1976). Accordingly, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, and we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAcc: Hon. Rob Bare, District Judge

• Anna Cherubini Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (Op 1947A 491/bVP 2
```

                                                                      EXHIBIT 15
May 6, 2005

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated May 6, 2005 on our review of interim
financial information of W. R. Grace & Co. (the "Company") for the three month
periods ended March 31, 2005 and March 31, 2004, and included in the Company's
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then ended, is incorporated by
reference in its Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-37024, 333-49083,
333-49507, 333-49509, 333-49511, 333-49513, 333-49515, 333-49517, 333-49703 and
333-49705).

Very truly yours,

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
McLean, Virginia
```
T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N NO. 03-14-00692- CV In re Christus Santa Rosa Health S ystem d/b /a Christus San ta Rosa Hospital - New Braun fels ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM CO MAL CO UNTY M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N The pe tition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8(a) .

__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Rose and Goodw in Filed: Nove mber 13, 2014
# Formatting Your Incident Numbers

**Posted: June 6, 2020**

            -   Find similar NFIRSGrams:
            - Basic Module
            - Coding
            - Data Quality

            - Share on:
            - 
            - 
            - 

This NFIRSGram explains options for coding the date into your National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) incident number field and why the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) recommends that incident numbers be exclusively numeric.

NFIRS will accept any value in the Incident Number field as long as it is **7 numerals or less in length**. Incident numbers cannot have dashes, hyphens or alpha characters.

Many fire departments include some type of date code in their incident numbers to help them identify the date upon which the incident occurred. This is possible, however, if a department runs more than 1,000 calls a year, then there is a limit on how much of the date you can include in the incident number.

## Important points for formatting incident numbers

              -  Limit the Incident Number field to 7 numerals.
              -  Incident numbers must be unique for each incident reported on a given day.

## Options for formatting your incident numbers

### Option 1 Maximum number of incidents per year: 999

If a department runs less than 1,000 calls a year, up to 4 digits of the date can be included in the incident number, such as month and day. For example, the incident number for the first incident that occurs on Jan. 1 would be 0101001.

If another incident occurs on the same day, then the next sequential incident number is used (e.g., 0101002, then 0101003, etc.). If the fourth incident of the year occurred on Jan. 2, you would use 0102004.

### Option 2 Maximum number of incidents per day: 999

Use the month and day code to capture all calls that occur on that day, such as 0101001, 0101002, 0102001 and 0102002. Start a new date code each day but start over at incident number 1.

### Option 3 Maximum number of incidents per year: 999

Use the year in the identifier, such as 2023001, 2023002, 2023003, etc.

### Option 4 Maximum number of incidents per year: 99,999

Use a 2-digit year identifier, such as 2300001, 2300002, 2300003, etc.

### Option 5 Maximum number of incidents per year: 9,999,999

Use a straight sequential incident number, such as 0000001, 0000002, 0000003, etc.

## Incident numbers generated by your computer-aided dispatch

Often, computer-aided dispatch (CAD) software will auto-populate incident numbers in the NFIRS software application. These CAD-generated numbers are typically 10 digits in length or longer. When this occurs, truncate the incident number in the NFIRS software to no more than 7 numerals. If the incident number is too long, the system will not permit the incident to be imported.

For more information about NFIRS, please contact the NFIRS Support Center: Monday – Friday between 8 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. ET, at 888-382-3827 or by email at fema-nfirshelp@fema.dhs.gov.
# C_2009149EN.01000101.xml

| 1.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 149/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 149/1

---

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 25 June 2009

to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska

(ECB/2009/14)

2009/C 149/01

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 (hereinafter the ‘Statute of the ESCB’), and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,

Whereas:

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

(1)

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

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 1 of Council Decision 2008/608/EC of 8 July 2008 in accordance with Article 122(2) of the Treaty on the adoption by Slovakia of the single currency on 1 January 2009 (1), Slovakia adopted the single currency on 1 January 2009. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 1 of Council Decision 2008/608/EC of 8 July 2008 in accordance with Article 122(2) of the Treaty on the adoption by Slovakia of the single currency on 1 January 2009 (1), Slovakia adopted the single currency on 1 January 2009.

1

| (3) | Pursuant to Article 38 of the Law on Národná banka Slovenska, as from 1 January 2009 the accounts of Národná banka Slovenska are audited in accordance with Article 27.1 of the Statute of the ESCB. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Pursuant to Article 38 of the Law on Národná banka Slovenska, as from 1 January 2009 the accounts of Národná banka Slovenska are audited in accordance with Article 27.1 of the Statute of the ESCB.

| (4) | Národná banka Slovenska has selected Deloitte Audit s.r.o. as its external auditors for the financial year 2009, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Národná banka Slovenska has selected Deloitte Audit s.r.o. as its external auditors for the financial year 2009,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Deloitte Audit s.r.o. should be appointed as the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska for the financial year 2009.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 25 June 2009.

The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude TRICHET

---

(1)  OJ L 195, 24.7.2008, p. 24.

1

---
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 Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. 00N-1489]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION: 

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a collection of information entitled “Sterility Requirements for Aqueous-Based Drug Products for Oral Inhalation” has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karen L. Nelson, Office of Information Resources Management (HFA-250), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-1482.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of September 18, 2000 (65 FR 56314), the agency announced that the proposed information collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under  44 U.S.C. 3507.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.  OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0353.  The approval expires on March 31, 2004.  A copy of the supporting statement for this information collection is available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/​ohrms/​dockets.                

Dated: April 24, 2001.

William K. Hubbard,

Senior Associate Commissioner for Policy, Planning, and Legislation.

[FR Doc. 01-10708 Filed 4-30-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
#### In the Matter of Pace Photographers, Ltd., Respondent. Herman Rosen, Appellant.

In a proceeding for the judicial dissolution of a corporation, the petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, from (1) stated portions of a decision of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.), dated April 3, 1987, which, *inter alia,*held that the respondent’s cross motion for an order authorizing the redemption of the petitioner’s stock should be granted, (2) so much of an order of the same court, dated June 15, 1987, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, and (3) stated portions of an order and judgment (one paper) of the same court, entered July 7, 1987, which, *inter alia,*declared that the fair value of the petitioner’s stock was $53,340.

*830Ordered that the appeal from the decision dated April 3, 1987 is dismissed, as no appeal lies from a decision; and it is further,

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated June 15, 1987 is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order made upon reargument or renewal of a decision; and it is further,

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

The petitioner, 1 of 5 shareholders in the corporation, had entered into a shareholders’ agreement which provided, among other things, for the method of determining the price for shares sold to the other stockholders within the first five years of the agreement. Within that period, the petitioner sought to compel the judicial dissolution of the corporation pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 1104-a. The remaining shareholders elected to purchase the petitioner’s shares at fair value pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 1118, thereby staying the dissolution proceeding. The petitioner consented to this buy-out *(see, Matter of Kemp & Beatley [Gardstein],*64 NY2d 63; *Matter of Doniger v Rye Psychiatric Hosp. Center,*122 AD2d 873). The sole question remaining was the determination of the fair value of the petitioner’s shares, so a hearing was not required on the petitioner’s allegations of misconduct *(Matter of Gordon & Weiss,*32 AD2d 279).

While the petitioner claims that the price of his shares, as computed by the agreement, is unfair, more than a mere disparity between that price and their current value must be shown *(see, Allen v Biltmore Tissue Corp.,*2 NY2d 534). The shareholders’ agreement was freely and voluntarily entered into by all of the shareholders and is clear and unambiguous as to its terms for a buy-out. "A review of the record reveals that the petitioner may obtain a fair return on his investment pursuant to the buy-out provisions of the shareholder’s agreement” *(Matter of Harris [Daniels Agency],*118 AD2d 646, 647).

Finally, the restrictive covenant contained in the shareholders’ agreement was reasonable in scope and duration and it was proper to enforce it *(see, Mohawk Maintenance Co. v Kessler,*52 NY2d 276; *Meteor Indus. v Metalloy Indus.,*104 AD2d 440). Lawrence, J. P., Weinstein, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
#### KIRKWOOD, Respondent, v. GEHRING, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

May 14, 1894.)

Appeal from circuit court, Kings county.

Action by Jane Kirkwood against Frank Gehring.

Magner & Hughes (Thomas F. Magner, of counsel), for appellant

Hurd & Grim (Wm. B. Hurd, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the decision of a judge after a trial before him without a jury. No case has been made, and the record contains no evidence except some exhibits. We can base our examination upon nothing but the findings of the judge, which we niust assume are supported and justified by evidence, and upon that assumption they are sufficient to sustain the judgment. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
**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 Form 10-K of Southern Union Company (the “Company”) for the
six-month period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David J. Kvapil,
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge (i) the Report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) **** of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except as otherwise noted under
Item 9A therein, and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
    /s/
DAVID J. KVAPIL
 David J.
Kvapil
 Executive
Vice President and
 Chief
Financial Officer
 March 16,
2005
  
  This
Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other documents
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
Winter Fire Safety

Portable 

Generators and 

Winter Storms

Portable generators are useful during winter storms, 

but if not used safely, they can cause injuries and death.

o Use portable generators outdoors in well-ventilated areas 

away from all doors, windows and vents.

o Make sure you have carbon monoxide alarms in your home.

o Do not use a generator in a wet area. This can cause shock or 

electrocution.

o Connect appliances to the generator with heavy-duty 

extension cords.

o Do not fuel your generator when it is 

running. Spilling gas on a hot engine 

can cause a fire.

For more information and free resources, visit

www.usfa.fema.gov.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

ALVIN T. ADDERLEY

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 16

- 4439

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. ________________________________/

Opinion filed June 2, 2017

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court

f or Brevard County

, James H. Earp , Judge.

Alvin T. Adderley, Perry, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton and

Andrea Totten , Assistant Attorney

General s , Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Alvin T. Adderley, appeals the trial court ’ s order den ying hi s Motion for

Postconviction Relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850

.

A ppellant argues that the trial judge had previously disqualified himself from the

underlying case and thus erred in ruling on A ppellant ’ s motion. We agree

. Therefore, we

vacate the order under review and remand this case to the trial court so a succe ssor judge2 can rule on the motion

. We note that the State concedes that the order under review “ is

void and a nul l ity.”

VACATED and REMANDED

.

COHEN, C.J. , SAWAYA and WALLIS , JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 8 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 9 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 10 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 11 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 12 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 13 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 14 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 15 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 16 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 17 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 18 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 19 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 20 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 21 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 22 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 23 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-04511-AKH Document 49-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 24 of 24