alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
David K. TRAYFORD, M.S., Petitioner v. NORTH CAROLINA PSYCHOLOGY BOARD, Respondent.

No. 649A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 7, 2006.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the *463Court of Appeals, ___ N.C.App. ___, 619 S.E.2d 862 (2005), reversing and remanding an order signed on 8 March 2004 by Judge Orlando F. Hudson, Jr. in Superior Court, Wake County. Heard in the Supreme Court 14 March 2006.

Allen and Pinnix, P.A., by J. Heydt Philbeck and M. Jackson Nichols, Raleigh, for petitioner-appellee.

Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Sondra C. Panico and Robert M. Curran, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.
----

**EXHIBIT        32.2**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY        ACT OF 2002**

| (1)    | the                  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly                  period                  ended September 30, 2005 (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 result of operations of the                  Company.                                                                                                                                                                        |

| Dated:                  October 21, 2005 | /s/                  Thomas B. Specketer       |   |
|-----------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                          | Thomas                  B. Specketer           |   |
|                                          | Vice                  President and Controller |   |
|                                          | (chief                  financial officer)     |   |
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 10752 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
WILLIAM CLARK PERSCHMANN , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:13

- CR

- 378

- 1

Before DAVIS, JONES and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent William Clark Perschmann has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Perschmann h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue f or

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 14, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-10752 Document: 00513154691 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/14/2015No. 14

- 10752

2 appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. We note, however, that there is a clerical error in the written judgment, which reflects that Perschmann owes a total of $6591 in restitution and specifies that Capital One Bank is owed sums of $1070 and $2851, while Green Bank is owed $1590. These amount s do not add up to $6591. During sentencing, the district court imposed the same total amount of restitution , listed these three amounts , and also order ed Perschmann to pay restitution in the amount of $1080 to Woodforest National Bank. The omission of t he amount owed to Woodforest National Bank from the written judgment is an apparent
clerical error. Accordingly, we REMAND for correction of the clerical error in the written judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
36. See United S tates v. Higgins , 739 F.3d 733, 739 n.16 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 134 S. Ct. 2319 (2014); United States v. Rosales , 448 F. App’x 466, 466

- 67 (5th Cir. 2011). Case: 14-10752 Document: 00513154691 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/14/2015
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                    Exhibit 10.1

                              ALLEGHANY CORPORATION
                      OUTSIDE DIRECTORS' CASH COMPENSATION

                             Effective July 1, 2005

<TABLE>
<S>                                                                   <C>
          For Service On:                                             Fee:
          ---------------                                             ----

Board of Directors                                   $30,000 per year; $1,000 per meeting attended and
                                                     $500 per conference telephone meeting

Executive Committee                                  $7,500 per year; $25,000 for Chairman

Audit Committee                                      $15,000 per year; $30,000 for Chairman

Compensation Committee                               $10,000 per year; $15,000 for Chairman

Nominating and Governance Committee                  $7,000 per year; $12,000 for Chairman

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of David Silverman, Appellant, v New York State Board of Parole, Respondent.

[800 NYS2d 855]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Clemente, J.), entered March 29, 2005 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner is serving a prison sentence of 5 to 15 years upon his 1996 conviction of assault in the first degree for shooting a man in the back during a verbal altercation. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging respondent’s denial of his request for parole release upon his second appearance. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and this appeal ensued.

We affirm. “Notwithstanding the receipt of a certificate of earned eligibility, [respondent] is justified in denying parole release where it concludes, based upon a review of the relevant statutory factors, that the inmate’s release is not compatible with the welfare of society or that the inmate will not be able to *1178live and remain at liberty without violating the law, if released” *(Matter of Morrero v Dennison,*19 AD3d 960, 961 [2005] [citations omitted]; *see*Correction Law § 805; Executive Law § 259-i [1] [a]; [2] [c] [A]; *Matter of Valderrama v Travis,*19 AD3d 904 [2005]). Here, inasmuch as the record reveals that respondent considered the relevant factors and there is no evidence that its decision is tainted by “ ‘irrationality bordering on impropriety’ ” *(Matter of Silmon v Travis,*95 NY2d 470, 476 [2000], quoting *Matter of Russo v New York State Bd. of Parole,*50 NY2d 69, 77 [1980]), we find no basis upon which to disturb that decision.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
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 Treasury

###### Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

          - [Docket ID OCC-2022-0012]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Department of the Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The OCC has determined that the renewal of the charter of the OCC Minority Depository Institutions Advisory Committee (MDIAC) is necessary and in the public interest. The OCC hereby gives notice of the renewal of the charter.

# DATES:

The charter of the OCC MDIAC has been renewed for a two-year period that began on June 23, 2022.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Beverly F. Cole, Acting Senior Deputy Comptroller for Midsize and Community Bank Supervision and Designated Federal Officer, (202) 649-5420, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 Seventh Street SW, 20219.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice of the renewal of the MDIAC charter is hereby given, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to section 9(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. The Comptroller of the Currency has determined that the renewal of the MDIAC charter is necessary and in the public interest to provide advice and information about the current circumstances and future development of minority depository institutions, in accordance with the goals established by section 308 of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), Public Law 101-73, Title III, 103 Stat. 353, 12 U.S.C. 1463 note, which are to preserve the present number of minority depository institutions, preserve the minority character of minority depository institutions in cases involving mergers or acquisitions, provide technical assistance, and encourage the creation of new minority depository institutions.

Michael J. Hsu,

Acting Comptroller of the Currency.

[FR Doc. 2022-15297 Filed 7-18-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
CPI Aerostructures, Inc. 8-K


 


Exhibit 10.4


 





CPI AEROSTRUCTURES, INC.


91
Heartland Blvd.


Edgewood,
New York 11717


 


 


 


 


 


July
7, 2016


 


 


 


 


Mr.
Vincent Palazzolo


 


 


Dear
Mr. Palazzolo:


 


Reference
is made to the Employment Agreement between you and CPI Aerostructures, Inc. (the “Company”), dated December 16, 2009,
as amended (the “Employment Agreement”).


 


The
Employment Agreement is hereby terminated. From and after the date hereof, the Employment Agreement will be of no further force
or effect, and the rights and obligations of each of you and the Company shall terminate.


 


Your
employment by the Company as its Chief Financial Officer will continue on an at-will basis at your current annual base salary.
Your bonus compensation for calendar year 2016 will be determined in accordance with Schedule A of the Employment Agreement. Your
base salary, incentive bonus plan and other compensation for calendar year 2017 and thereafter will determined by the Compensation
Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors.


 


Please
confirm your agreement with the foregoing by signing below where indicated.


 


 


	 	Sincerely, 
	 	 
	 	CPI
AEROSTRUCTURES, INC.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By:	 	 
	 	 	Douglas McCrosson
	 	 	Chief Executive Officer 



  


	AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED:	 
	 	 
	 	 
	Vincent Palazzolo
Keith DANIELS, Administrator of the Estate of Lorren Alaine Daniels, and Tonya Koonce-Daniels and Keith Daniels, Individually v. DURHAM COUNTY HOSPITAL CORPORATION d/b/a Durham Regional Hospital; Doe Corporations One Through Five; and Doe Individuals One Through Five.

No. 554P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2006.

Robert J. Burford, James W. Vaughan, Raleigh, for Daniels, et al.

Timothy P. Lehan, Christopher G. Smith, Raleigh, for Durham Regional Hospital.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 21st day of September 2005 by Plaintiffs in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of January 2006."
STATE v. Stevie Douglas IVEY.

No. 182P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 11, 2006.

Constance E. Widenhouse, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Stevie Douglas Ivey.

Robert F. Johnson, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th day of April 2006 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of April 2006."
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC v. COUCH.

No. COA05-1505.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed July 5, 2006.

Certification Date July 25, 2006.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (00SP815).

Case without published opinion. Affirmed.
Letter agreemnet wtih Gary E. Dickerson



 Exhibit 10.2 
 

 
  
 August 2, 2005

  
 Gary E. Dickerson 
 11850 Upland Way 
 Cupertino, California 95014 
  
 Dear
Gary: 
  
 This letter agreement (this “Agreement”) amends the prior
agreement dated as of October 14, 2004 (the “Prior Agreement”) between you and Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates, Inc. (“VSEA”). As we have agreed, on March 18, 2005, you were granted 19,231 shares of restricted
stock in lieu of 62,500 “Additional Options” (as defined in the Prior Agreement). In addition, on August 12, 2005 (the “Grant Date”), you will be granted 10,714 shares of restricted stock in lieu of the remaining 37,500
Additional Options that were to be issued to you under the Prior Agreement. This grant of Restricted Stock will complete the originally contemplated grant of 400,000 stock options to you upon your joining VSEA. The shares of restricted stock will
vest as to one-fourth (1/4) of such shares one year after the Grant Date, and the remaining three-fourths (3/4) will vest in twelve (12) equal quarterly installments thereafter until one hundred percent (100%) of the shares shall
have been vested at the end of four (4) years. 
  
 Please sign below to indicate your agreement with these terms. 
  
 Best regards, 
  
 Gary L. Loser 
 Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel 
  
 ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO: 
  

	/s/    Gary	E. Dickerson 


	Signature
**Exhibit 32**

**CertificationsPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

The certificationset forth below is being submitted in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the fiscal quarter ended July 1, 2006 (the “Report”) for the purposeof complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

Richard W.Dreiling, the Chief Executive Officer and John K. Henry, the Chief FinancialOfficer of Duane Reade Holdings, Inc., each certifies that:

1.     the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) ofthe Exchange Act; and

2.     the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of Duane Reade Holdings, Inc.

|                            |     | /s/ Richard W. Dreiling   |
|----------------------------|----------|---------------------------|
|                       |     | Richard W. Dreiling       |
|                       | * * | *Chief Executive Officer* |
|                       |     |                      |
|                       |     | /s/ John K. Henry         |
|                       |     | John K. Henry             |
| Date: August 15, 2006 | * * | *Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
Order entered December 1, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 19
- 00923
- CV CURTIS MAYS, Appellant

V. PIPER HUNN, TRISHA MOORE AND RED DOG PROPERTIES, LLC, Appelle e s On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 17
- 04535
- C

ORDER On November 16, 2020, this Court ordered court reporter Janet Wright to file by November 25, 2020, a supplemental reporter’s record containing the exhibits admitted in evidence at the trial of this case. As of the date of this order, Ms. Wright has not filed the supplemental reporter’s record. We ORDER Janet Wright to file a supplemental reporter’s record containing the exhibits admitted at
th e trial by December 8, 2020.We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms.

Wright and the parties.

/s/ LESLIE OSBORNE PRESIDING JUSTICE
STATE of North Carolina v. Pablo Aguilers FEUNTES aka Sergio Sanchez Flores.

No. 171P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

Pablo A. Feuntes, Pro Se.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 29th day of March 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Wilson County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."
STATE v. MELVIN.

COA05-1596.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed October 17, 2006.

Certification Date November 6, 2006.

Appeal from Cumberland (03CRS59624, 03CRS60471)

Case reported without published opinion. Reversed and remanded.
GILREATH v. NCDHHR.

No. 310A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 12, 2006.

David G. Schiller, Raleigh, for Teresa S. Gilreath.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th day of July 2006 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant shall have up to and including the 25th day of August 2006 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 12th day of July 2006."
#### Walter Glenn, Jr., et al., Appellants, v Craig S. Couvopoulo et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[800 NYS2d 737]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Ealmieri, J.), dated February 27, 2004, as denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability against the defendants Craig S. Couvopoulo and Long Island Rail Road, and granted the cross motion of those defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof granting the cross motion of the defendants Craig S. Couvopoulo and Long Island Rail Road for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them and substituting therefor a provision denying the cross *527motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the complaint is reinstated insofar as asserted against those defendants.

The plaintiff Walter Glenn, Jr., allegedly was injured when his car was struck by a wheel that dislodged from a vehicle owned by the defendant Long Island Rail Road (hereinafter the LIRR) and operated by the defendant Craig S. Couvopoulo. The plaintiffs alleged that the LIRR and Couvopoulo were negligent in their maintenance and operation of the vehicle. After the completion of discovery, the plaintiffs moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability against Couvopoulo and the LIRR. Couvopoulo and the LIRR cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. The Supreme Court denied the motion and granted the cross motion. We modify.

Couvopoulo and the LIRR failed to establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them *(see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). A question of fact exists as to whether Couvopoulo and the LIRR were negligent in the inspection and maintenance of the vehicle, as they failed to produce the LIRR daily vehicle inspection reports for the date of the accident *(see*Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388; *Elfeld v Burkham Auto Renting Co.,*299 NY 336, 346 [1949]). Moreover, a question of fact exists as to whether the LIRR had exclusive possession of the vehicle so as to permit the plaintiffs to invoke the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. After all, the LIRR had possession of the vehicle all day and the vehicle was driven 33 miles before the accident on the day it occurred. Because Couvopoulo and the LIRR did not sustain their burden on the cross motion, we need not address the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ opposition papers *(see Coscia v 938 Trading Corp.,*283 AD2d 538 [2001]; *Mariaca-Olmos v Mizrhy,*226 AD2d 437 [1996]).

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability against Couvopoulo and the LIRR. S. Miller, J.P., Santucci, Goldstein and Crane, JJ., concur.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No s . 1D 18

- 1083 1D18

- 2998 (Consolidated for Disposition)

_____________________________
R OGER W ILLIAM N ELSON , Former Husband
, Appellant,

v.

I SOLDE U. N ELSON , Former Wife
, Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County

. Ana Garcia , Judge

. September 5, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R OWE , J AY , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Jerry L. Rumph, Jr. and Jennifer L. Sweeting of Sweeting & Rumph, P.A., Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Jeffrey P. Whitton, Panama City
, for Appellee.