alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(October 6, 1987)

#### Michael J. Tully, III, Plaintiff, v Town of North Hempstead et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, et al., Defendant. Nissan Motor Corporation, Appellant.

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, Nissan Motor Corporation (hereinafter Nissan) appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Widlitz, J.), dated October 29, 1986, which denied its motion, *inter alia,*to preclude the first and second third-party plaintiffs from introducing evidence at the trial based on their failure to timely furnish an adequate supplemental bill of particulars as to the items demanded.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

In response to Nissan’s demand for a supplemental bill of particulars from the third-party plaintiffs, it was alleged, *inter alia,*that the materials used in the manufacture of the automobile involved in the instant accident were inadequate, that the "A-pillar” and door assembly of the automobile were not impact resistant, lacking reinforced members, and that the sheet metal used was of a lesser grade in thickness than that found in other vehicles. These enumerated structural defects, it was alleged, contributed to the over-all unsafe character of the automobile. The information furnished by the third-party plaintiffs in their supplemental bills of particulars was sufficient.

"A bill of particulars is not a form of disclosure * * * '[It] is of limited scope and may not be used to obtain evidentiary material’ ” *(Bouton v County of Suffolk,*125 AD2d 620, 621, quoting from *Ginsberg v Ginsberg,*104 AD2d 482, 484). Nissan’s request that it be furnished with such information as the tensile, compression, torsion, or bending strength of the metal, is beyond the scope of the information a party is required to furnish in a bill of particulars *(see, Nuss v Pettibone Mercury Corp.,*112 AD2d 744). Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Lawrence and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Clear All

        25 November 2022    

                     USNS COMFORT COMPLETES ITS THIRD MISSION STOP OF CP 2022 IN COLOMBIA                 
                CARTAGENA, Colombia (Nov. 20, 2022) U.S. Navy hospital ship USNS Comfort (T-AH 20) completed its third mission stop of Continuing Promise 2022 in Cartagena, Colombia, Nov. 20, 2022.During the ship’s nine-day visit to Colombia, Continuing Promise assisted over 4,400 patients from Cartagena and            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Teri Lisa Rubio, * From the 318th District

Court of Midland County,

 Trial Court No. FM-50,673.

Vs. No. 11-13-00189-CV * July 30, 2015

Robert Earl Klein, * Memorandum Opinion by Wright, C.J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no 

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, the 

judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed. The costs incurred by reason of this 

appeal are taxed against Teri Lisa Rubio.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 15
August 14, 2001

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

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated August 14, 2001 on our review of interim
financial information of W. R. Grace & Co. (the "Company") as of and for the
period ended June 30, 2001, 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
Baltimore, Maryland
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER 

LOWER MANHATTAN DISASTER 

SITE LITIGATION 

 21MC102(AKH)

FABIO MORALES (AND WIFE, MARTHA MORALES, 

Plaintiff(s), 

-against100 CHURCH LLC, et al., 

Defendants. 

 07CV1667(AKH)

NOTICE OF ADOPTION BY 

ZAR REALTY 

MANAGEMENT CORP. OF 

ANSWER TO MASTER 

COMPLAINT

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant ZAR REALTY MANAGEMENT CORP. 

n/k/a SAPIR REALTY MANAGEMENT CORP. for the building located at 100 Church 

Street, (hereinafter “Zar/Sapir”) as and for its response to the allegations set forth in the 

Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off Complaint) related to the Master Complaint adding new 

defendants not previously served filed in the above-referenced action, herein adopts Zar/Sapir 's 

Answer to Master Complaint dated August 1, 2007, which was filed in the matter of In re World 

Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). ZAR/SAPIR has 

filed a Master Disclosure of Interested Parties in 21 MC 102 (AKH), and as such, is exempt from 

having to file such a disclosure in this specific matter, pursuant to the provisions of Case 

Management Order No. 4 (¶ J(2)). 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT defendant, Zar/Sapir reserves its right to 

assert any defenses to which it is entitled, including but not limited to those enumerated in Case 

Management Order No. 4 (¶¶ D(1)-(5)). 

Case 1:07-cv-01667-AKH Document 18 Filed 12/04/2007 Page 1 of 3
WHEREFORE, Zar/Sapir demands judgment dismissing the above-captioned action as 

against it, together with its costs and disbursements. 

Dated: New York, New York 

 December 4, 2007 

HARRIS BEACH PLLC 

Attorneys for Defendant 

ZAR REALTY MANAGEMENT CORP. n/k/a 

SAPIR REALTY MANAGEMENT CORP. 

 /s/ 

 Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062) 

100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor 

New York, New York 10005 

(212) 687-0100 

TO: 

Paul Napoli, Esq. 

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP 

115 Broadway, 12th Floor 

New York, New York 10006 

Robert A. Grochow, Esq. 

Robert A. Grochow, P.C. 

233 Broadway, 5th Floor 

New York, New York 10279 

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq. 

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata 

233 Broadway, 5th Floor 

New York, New York 10279 

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiff

James E. Tyrrell, Esq. 

Joseph Hopkins, Esq. 

Patton Boggs LLP 

One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor 

Newark, New Jersey 07102 

Thomas Egan, Esq. 

Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP 

One Liberty Plaza 

New York, New York 10006 

Liaison Counsel for the Defendants 

All Counsel via ECF 

Case 1:07-cv-01667-AKH Document 18 Filed 12/04/2007 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATION AS TO SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on December 4, 2007, I caused to be filed and 

served the following document electronically via the Court’s ECF system upon the parties: 

1. Notice of Zar Realty Management Corp.’s Adoption of Answer to Master 

Complaint. 

Dated: December 4, 2007 

 /s/ 

 Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062) 

Case 1:07-cv-01667-AKH Document 18 Filed 12/04/2007 Page 3 of 3
#### Josiah Bruce *vs.*Miles Sidelinger.

Lincoln.

Opinion February 11, 1890.

*Lumber. Bark. Sale. Survey. B. S., c.*41.

The statute, which requires lumber of any kind to be surveyed or measured to ascertain its quantity, does not apply to labor in any way expended on lumber, though to be x>aid for according to the thousands or cords of such lumber; — it applies only to sales of lumber.

On exceptions.

At the trial before the jury, the plaintiff was permitted, to testify, against the defendant’s objection, to. his own measurement of the bark peeled and hauled, and his own survey of the logs hauled. The bark and logs were taken from the land of the defendant, under a written contract between the parties, by which the plaintiff in consideration of his services for cutting, peeling and hauling was to be paid at certain stated prices per cord of bark, and thousand feet of logs, respectively.

The plaintiff did not offer evidence of a measurement by a sworn surveyor.

The presiding justice instructed the jury, in substance, that the statute which provides for measuring by a sworn surveyor did not apply in the case, and that the plaintiff might prove, by any legitimate evidence satisfactory to the jury, the amount of bark and logs which he cut and hauled under the contract.

There was a verdict for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted to the admission of the evidence and the instructions to the jury.

(r. *B.*Sawyer, for defendant.

*L. M.*Staples, for plaintiff.

Peters, C. J.

The.plaintiff sued for his services in peeling bark, cutting logs, and hauling the bark and logs to a place of delivery. He was to be paid by the cord for peeling and hauling the- bark, and by the thousands of feet for the work on the lum*319ber. He was allowed to testify to a measurement of the bark and a survey of the lumber made by himself. The defendant contends that the quantities should have been proved by a sworn surveyor, or by the certificate of a sworn surveyor. That cannot be. The statute which requires sworn officers to make surveys and measurements, distinctly and in terms relates to sales only. Work upon lumber is a very different thing from a sale of lumber. The construction which the defendant invokes would be impracticable in its operation.

*Exceptions overruled.*

Walton, Virgin, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S  FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED  SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                               1,000
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                         198,102
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               198,102
<PP&E>                                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              21,125,823
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        1,343,026
<BONDS>                                                     15,166,177
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        3,864,198
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                           355
<OTHER-SE>                                                     252,067
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                21,125,823
<SALES>                                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                     0
<CGS>                                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                23,198
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               (14,932)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           (14,932)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  (14,932)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                    (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    (.09)
        

</TABLE>
#### In re PLANK.

(District Court, D. Montana.

June 21, 1923.)

No. 2815.

1. Bankruptcy @=>408(3)—Transfer to wife before four-months period held no objection to discharge; “fraudulent concealment.”

Under Bankruptcy Act, § 14b, subd. 4 (Comp. St. § 9598), transfer of realty to bankrupt’s wife for nominal consideration before tbe four months preceding petition for adjudication was not a “fraudulent concealment,” barring discharge, although the deed was recorded within the four months’ period, in view of sections 3, 60 (Comp. St. § 9587, 9643).

[Ed. Note.—For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Fraudulent Concealment.]

*2.*Bankruptcy @=>404(1)—Discharge and objection are statutory.

Discharge *and*objection are statutory, and the bankrupt is entitled to discharge, unless the Objection comes within the statute.

In Bankruptcy. In the matter of F. W. Plank, bankrupt. On application for discharge.

Discharge granted.

A. B. Hughes, of Whitefish, Mont., for bankrupt.

David Ross, of Kalispell, Mont., for objecting creditor.

<gp»For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests *&*Indexes

BOURQUIN, District Judge.

Objection to discharge, that within four months preceding petition for adjudication filed June 26, 1922, the bankrupt “knowingly and fraudulently concealed his property,” real estate, “in that * * * for a pretended consideration of $1” he transferred it to his wife, “with intent then and there to hinder, delay, and defraud his creditors.” Evidence, that the transfer was by deed on May 23, 1921, and recorded on May 29, 1922. Theory of objector, that the four months’ period commences to run from the record of the transfer, analogous to the like period in respect to acts of bankruptcy and preferences.

[1, 2] The error of the theory and the failure of the analogy are obvious, when it is noted that in the latter Bankruptcy Act, §§ 3, 60 (Comp. St. §§ 9587, 9643), so prescribes, and in the former it (section 14b, subd. 4, Comp. St. § 9598), does not. This difference in legislative language must be given effect. Discharge and objection are statutory. The bankrupt is entitled to discharge, unless the objection comes within the statute. It does not in the instant case. The objection is overruled, and discharge is granted.

Whether or not the transfer is voidable by the trustee of the bankrupt’s estate is not material here.
Clear All

        03 April 2023    

                    Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group Completes COMPTUEX                 
                The Sailors, ships, squadrons and staffs of the Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group (GRFCSG) successfully completed composite training unit exercise (COMPTUEX), April 2, 2023.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
3056877.1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

--------------------------------------------------------------X

IN RE: WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE

LITIGATION

-------------------------------------------------------------

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No.:

21 MC 102 (AKH)

JESUS QUIZHPI,

Plaintiffs,

- against -

WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC., et al,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No.:

07-CV-4509-AKH

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

BY DEFENDANT

WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.

-----------------------------------------------------------------X

To the Clerk of this Court and All Parties of Record:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. (“Weston”), by

and through its attorneys, WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP,

hereby appears in the above-entitled action, and that all pleadings and papers in this action be

served upon the undersigned at the office and address stated below. The undersigned certifies

that he is admitted to practice before this Court.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Weston has previously appeared and served

its notice of adoption of answer in the Master Docket 21 MC 102, and files this notice merely for

the purposes of receiving CM/ECF notifications.

Case 1:07-cv-04509-AKH Document 28 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

3056877.1

Dated: New York, New York

December 14, 2007

Yours etc.,

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP

By: _/s/ Jason Harrington_____

Jason Harrington (JH7273)

Attorneys for Defendant

Weston Solutions, Inc.

150 E 42

nd

Street

New York, NY 10017

(212) 490-3000 (p)

(212) 490-3038 (f)

To: All parties via ECF

Case 1:07-cv-04509-AKH Document 28 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 2 of 2
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   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Freedom Resources Enterprises, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Neil Christiansen, Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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 result of operations of the Company.   October 20, 2009/s/ Neil ChristiansenNeil Christiansen, President( Chief Executive OfficerPrincipal Financial Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Mark D. Gessler, Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)) of
Gene Logic Inc. (the Registrant), certify that to the best of my knowledge,
based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2003 of the Registrant (the Report):

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



| | By: /s/ Mark D. Gessler
Name: Mark D. Gessler
Date: May 14, 2003
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------
EXHIBIT 21-1

 

 

**SUBSIDIARIES**

**OF**

**BMC INDUSTRIES, INC.**

** **

** **

** **

1.    Buckbee-Mears Europe GmbH

2.    Buckbee-Mears Hungary Kft.

3.    Buckbee-Mears Medical Technologies, LLC

4.    Vision-Ease Lens, Inc.

5.    Vision-Ease Lens Azusa, LLC

6.    Vision Ease Lens Limited

7.    Vision-Ease Canada, Ltd.

8.    P. T. Vision-Ease Asia, joint venture with P.T. AstronLensindo Nusa

9.    Buckbee-Mears Holding Company B.V.

10.   Buckbee-Mears European Holding Company B.V.

11.   Buckbee-Mears Deutschland Holding GmbH & Company KG

12.   Vision-Ease France SAS

13.   Vision-Ease Deutschland GmbH

14.   Buckbee-Mears Deutschland Verwaltungs GmbH

15.   Buckbee-Mears Netherlands B.V.
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

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel ZDK1 GRB-7 C1.                    

*Date:*                         May 24, 2001.                              ( print page 22591)    

*Time:*                         11:00 am to 12:30 pm.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         Democracy Plaza II, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Rm #754, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lakshmanan Sankaran, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, Room 754, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-6600, (301) 594-7799.                    

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: April 26, 2001.

Anna Snouffer,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 01-11186 Filed 5-3-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M