alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ginette Jean-Louis, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Defendants, and New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.

[875 NYS2d 195]—

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dorsa, J), entered June 30, 2008, as, upon an order dated September 17, 2007, granting the motion of the defendant New York City Transit Authority pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, made before the close of the plaintiffs case, is in favor of that defendant and against her dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant.

Ordered that, on the Court’s own motion, the plaintiffs notice of appeal from the order dated September 17, 2007, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment *(see*CPLR 5520 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, the order dated September 17, 2007, is modified accordingly, the motion is denied, the complaint is reinstated as to the defendant New York City Transit Authority, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for a new trial, with costs to abide the event.

On December 5, 2003, the plaintiff slipped and fell outside a bus depot-in South Jamaica, Queens. At trial, the plaintiff testified that she slipped on a piece of metal covered with snow and ice. However, she could not identify the piece of metal shown in a photograph of the accident site that had been taken at some point after the accident. At the end of the plaintiffs testimony, before two of her witnesses had the opportunity to testify, the defendant New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter the defendant) moved pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law on the ground that the plaintiff could not identify the *738cause of her fall. The court granted the defendant’s motion and dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

The court erred in dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant before the plaintiff had completed her proof *(see Greenbaum v Hershman,*31 AD3d 607 [2006]; *Balogh v H.R.B. Caterers,*88 AD2d 136, 141 [1982]). The plaintiff should have been afforded the opportunity to call her niece, who allegedly witnessed the accident, and her expert, to testify *(see Greenbaum v Hershman,*31 AD3d 607 [2006]). Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Belen and Chambers, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension  Partners  1994-C,  Ltd.'s  balance  sheet and  statement of  operations
contained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         1,099
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  37,894
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               38,993
<PP&E>                                         3,151,104
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,339,662)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 850,435
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          398,165
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     452,270
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   850,435
<SALES>                                        105,320
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               105,419
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,268,351<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,214,003)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,214,003)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,214,003)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Walter HURDLE, petitioner, v. Mike SHEAHAN, Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility.

No. 15-9112.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
mbcc-ex103_26.htm



Exhibit 10.3

 

AMENDMENT TO SHARED SERVICES AGREEMENT

 

This Amendment dated as of January 1, 2016 (“Amendment Effective Date”) by and between Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. (“Nexstar”) and Mission Broadcasting, Inc. (“Mission”) is made to that certain Shared Services Agreement dated as of April 1, 2002 by and between Mission Broadcasting of Joplin, Inc. and Nexstar Broadcasting of Joplin, L.L.C., as amended by those certain amendments dated November 16, 2004 and December 30, 2005, and as extended by letter agreement on March 28, 2012 (collectively, the “Agreement”).

 

WHEREAS, Mission is the licensee of television broadcast station KODE-TV, Joplin, Missouri;

 

WHEREAS, Nexstar is the licensee of television broadcasting station KSNF, Joplin, Missouri; 

 

WHEREAS, Mission and Nexstar have entered into the Agreement for their mutual benefit;

 

NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the foregoing, Nexstar and Mission hereby amend the Agreement as follows:

 

1. Paragraph 4(g) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted in its place: “4(g) Services Fee. In consideration for the services to be provided to the Stations by Nexstar personnel as described in Sections 4(a) through 4(f), Mission will pay Nexstar the fee (“Services Fee”) described in Section 4(g).

 

(i)Base Amount. Subject to the remaining provisions of this Section 4(g), the base amount of the Services Fee will be $83,333.33 per month.

 

(ii) Payment Terms. The Services Fee will be payable monthly, in arrears, from and after the month during which this Agreement is executed, and will be prorated on a daily basis for the first and last months during which the sharing arrangements described in Sections 4(a) through 4(f) are in effect.” 

 

2.These revised payment terms are effective as of the Amendment Effective Date.

 

3. As so amended, all sections and provisions of the Agreement are hereby ratified in full. 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this amendment as of the Amendment Effective Date above.

 


			
	
NEXSTAR BROADCASTING, INC.

 
	
 
	
MISSION BROADCASTING, INC.

	
By: /s/ Thomas E. Carter
	
 
	
By: /s/ Dennis Thatcher

	
 

Name: Thomas E. Carter
	
 
	
 

Name: Dennis Thatcher

	
 

Title: EVP & Chief Financial Officer
	
 
	
 

Title: President
**Exhibit
32.1**
 
 
 **CERTIFICATION
BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
 **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 GenVec, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form
10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I,
 Paul H.
Fischer, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge,
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
      Registrant for the dates and periods covered by the
  Report.
 
 This
certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief
Executive Officer of the Company with the requirements of Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by
any person or for any reason other than as specifically required by
law.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
GenVec, Inc. and will be retained by GenVec, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
  March
      15,
      2005/s/Paul
      H. Fischer, Ph.D.Paul
      H. Fischer, Ph.D.President
      and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 10.7




---



##### 



Fourth Amendment Borrower Bank of America Wells Fargo Lenders
 BACKGROUND
 Credit Agreement
    AMENDMENTS
 Aggregate Commitments
 Aggregate Commitments
 Accordion Amount
 Accordion Amount
 Applicable Margin
 Applicable Margin




---



##### 



APPLICABLE
    
    APPLICABLEMARGIN FOR
    
    MARGIN FORBASE RATE
    
    EURODOLLAR
    
    COMMITMENTLEVEL
    
    LEVERAGE RATIO
    
    LOANS
    
    RATE LOANS
    
    FEE1
    
    
    Less than or equal to 1.50 to 1.00
    
    
    0
    %
    
    
    1.000
    %
    
    
    0.200
    %2
    
    
    Greater than 1.50 to 1.00 and less than or
equal to 2.25 to 1.00
    
    
    0
    %
    
    
    1.250
    %
    
    
    0.250
    %3
    
    
    Greater than 2.25 to 1.00 and less than or
equal to 3.00 to 1.00
    
    
    0
    %
    
    
    1.500
    %
    
    
    0.250
    %4
    
    
    Greater than 3.00 to 1.00
    
    
    0.250
    %
    
    
    1.750
    %
    
    
    0.375
    %




---



##### 



Contract Term
 Contract Term
 Fourth
Amendment Effective Date
 Fourth Amendment Effective Date
   1.
    
    Fixed Charge Ratio. Fixed Charge Ratio shall not at
any time be less than 2.00 to 1.00.2.
    
    Leverage Ratio. Leverage Ratio shall not at any time
be more than 3.50 to 1.00.3.
    
    Leverage Ratio. Leverage Ratio for more than two
consecutive Fiscal Quarters shall not exceed 3.00 to 1.00.4.
    
    Capital Expenditures. Capital Expenditures shall not
exceed $30,000,000 during any fiscal year.
  Limitation on Indebtedness provided




---



##### 



Dividends, Distributions, Redemptions
 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES TRUE; NO EVENT OF DEFAULT




---



##### 



CONDITIONS TO EFFECTIVENESS
    Section 2
   REFERENCE TO THE CREDIT AGREEMENT.
   COSTS, EXPENSES AND TAXES




---



##### 



GUARANTORS ACKNOWLEDGMENT
 EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS
 GOVERNING LAW; BINDING EFFECT
 HEADINGS
 ENTIRE AGREEMENT




---



##### 



BORROWER:ENCORE WIRE CORPORATIONBy:
Name:
    
    /s/ Frank J. Bilban

Frank J. BilbanTitle:
    
    Vice President &
Chief Financial Officer




---



##### 



ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT:BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Suzanne M. Paul

Suzanne M. PaulTitle:
    
    Vice PresidentBANK OF AMERICA, N.A., as a LenderCommitment:$90,000,000By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Allison W. Connally

Allison W. ConnallyTitle:
    
    Vice President




---



##### 



WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as a
LenderCommitment: $60,000,000By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Douglas I. Sako

Douglas I. SakoTitle:
    
    Vice President




---



##### 



EWC AVIATION CORP.
 /s/ Frank J. Bilban
No. 541.

#### Rainier National Park Co. *v.*Henneford et al.

December 9, 1935.

*Mr. Edgar N. Eisenhower*for petitioner.

*Mr. E. P. Donnelly*for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Washington denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RODNEY WILLIAMS,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 283 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 13th day of November, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
Michael VIRGA, petitioner, v. Randy LEE, Warden.

No. 16-5770.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Steven Kane CROUCH, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 15-8974.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.2*

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Cognex Corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies
that the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 28, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

         Date: November 4, 2003

                                    /s/ Richard A. Morin
                                    --------------------------------------
                                    Richard A. Morin
                                    Senior Vice President Of Finance,
                                    Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
                                    (principal financial officer)

* This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of
that section, nor shall it be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any
filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Exhibit (d)(176)

**SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENT**

**between**

**FIL INVESTMENT ADVISORS**

**and**

**FIDELITY MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH COMPANY**

**and**

**FIDELITY INVESTMENT TRUST**
**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**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), I, Chung-Lun Yang, certify that:

| 1. | The Annual Report of ACL Semiconductors Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof, 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. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                       |   |   |                                                             |
|----------------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: January      6, 2010 |   |   | /s/ Chung-Lun Yang                                               |
|                       |   |   | Chung-Lun YangChief Executive Officer of ACL Semiconductors Inc. |

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ACL Semiconductors Inc. and will be retained by ACL Semiconductors Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**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 GenVec, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form
      10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Paul H. Fischer, as President and Chief Executive Officer of
      the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of
      my knowledge, 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
                Registrant for the dates and periods covered by the
                Report.





This
      certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company with the requirements of Section 906 of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used
      by
      any person or for any reason other than as specifically required by
      law.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      GenVec, Inc. and will be retained by GenVec, Inc. and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




March
                17, 2008/s/
                Paul H. Fischer, Ph.D.Paul
                H. Fischer, Ph.D.President
                and Chief Executive Officer
Kavin Maurice RHODES, petitioner, v. Earnest ROWE, Warden, et al.

No. 16-5780.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
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 ChrisKen  Growth & Income L.P.
II, a Delaware  limited  partnership  (the  "Company"),  on Form  10-QSB for the
period  ending  June  30,  2003,  as  filed  with the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert Mayer,  Chief Financial
Officer of ChrisKen Income Properties,  Inc. II, the managing general partner 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, to my knowledge and based
on my review of the Report:

     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.





                                  By:      /S/ROBERT MAYER
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Robert Mayer
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          ChrisKen Income Properties, Inc. II ,
                                            Managing General Partner
                                          ChrisKen Growth & Income L.P. II

                                             August 14, 2003


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  ChrisKen  Growth & Income L.P. II and will be retained by ChrisKen
Growth & Income L.P. II and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  commission
or its staff upon request.
John L. GALLO, et al., petitioners, v. MOEN, INCORPORATED.

No. 16-222.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6135** 

WILLIE COLEY , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. HAROLD CLARKE , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Arenda L. Wright Allen , District Judge. ( 2:14

- cv - 00120

- AWA

- DEM )

Submitted : June 29 , 2015 Decided: July 9, 2015

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Remanded by un published per curiam opinion

. Willie Coley , Appellant Pro Se. Lauren Catherine Campbell , OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA , Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Willie Coley seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. His notice of appeal was received in the district court shortly after expiration of the appeal period. Because Coley is incarcerated, t he notice is considered filed as of the date it was properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). The record does not conclusively reveal when Coley delivered the notic e of appeal to prison officials for mailing. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to obtain this information from the parties and to determine whether the filin g was timely under Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1) and Houston v. Lack . The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED