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

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

February 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135356 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135356 

 COA: 272250

 Wayne CC: 06-000475-01 

EDUARDO PELLOT,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 23, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0211 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

February 19, 2008 

 Clerk
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-79225 and 333-51034) pertaining to theCorinthian Colleges, Inc. 1998 Performance Award Plan, (Form S-8 No. 333-51032) pertaining to the Corinthian Colleges, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan, (Form S-8 Nos. 333-115763 and 333-131800) pertaining to the Corinthian Colleges, Inc. 2003Performance Award Plan, (Form S-8 No. 333-117889) pertaining to the Corinthian Colleges, Inc. Executive Deferral Plan, and (Form S-8 No. 333-124955) pertaining to the Corinthian Colleges, Inc. 2004 New-Hire Award Plan of our reports datedSeptember 8, 2005 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. and subsidiaries, Corinthian Colleges, Inc. and subsidiaries management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. and subsidiaries, included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended June 30, 2005. 

 

/s/    ERNST AND YOUNG LLP 

 

Orange County, California 

February 21, 2006
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT


TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Sun River Energy, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending April 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Donal R. Schmidt, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.


(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 Company.





Dated: August 15, 2012


/s/ Donal R. Schmidt, Jr.

Donal R. Schmidt, Jr.,Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 57986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19793]



[[Page 57985]]

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

Part III





Department of Labor





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



Cancellation of Secretary's Orders; Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2005 / 
Notices

[[Page 57986]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary

[SECRETARY'S ORDER 3-2005]


Cancellation of Secretary's Orders

    1. Purpose. To cancel Secretary's Orders which no longer serve the 
needs of the Department of Labor.
    2. Background. Secretary's Orders are periodically reviewed to 
determine their applicability within the Department. Those Orders which 
have been incorporated in other departmental directives or no longer 
serve departmental needs are canceled.
    3. The following Orders are canceled immediately.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Number                               Subject
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-67.............................  Department of Labor Legislative
                                     Committee.
11-74.............................  Federal Advisory Council on
                                     Unemployment Insurance.
14-77.............................  Delegations of Authority.
8-79..............................  Law Enforcement Services at Job
                                     Corps Centers on Property Under
                                     Exclusive Federal Legislative
                                     Jurisdiction.
7-82..............................  Department of Labor Consumer Affairs
                                     Program.
2-84..............................  Transfer of Responsibility for
                                     Providing Administrative Support to
                                     the National Commission for
                                     Employment Policy and National
                                     Occupational Information
                                     Coordinating Committee.
4-90..............................  Delegation of Authority and
                                     Assignment of Responsibilities for
                                     Equal Employment Opportunity in
                                     Apprenticeship and Training.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: September 19, 2005.
Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 05-19793 Filed 10-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-23-P
Jennifer MATHIS, Plaintiff, v. Jory Dillon MATHIS, Defendant.

No. COA17-1071

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 17, 2018

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS



The
undersigned, as the chief executive officer of Valley Financial Corporation, certify that the Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Valley Financial Corporation at the dates and for
the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code and is subject to the knowledge and willfulness qualifications contained in Title 18, Chapter 63, Section
1350(c).



Dated: March 31, 2005



/s/ Ellis L. GutshallChief Executive Officer




95
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Robert C. Gasser, certify that:

 

1.                                      I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Investment Technology Group, Inc.; and

 

2.                                      Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 
| Date: June 19, 2014 |                                       |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|                     | /s/ ROBERT C. GASSER                       |
|                     |                                       |
|                     | Robert C. Gasser *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Sammie Sheff, Respondent, v County of Westchester, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

[719 NYS2d 696]

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the County of West-*633Chester appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered November 16, 1999, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

On May 6, 1999, the respondent Sammie Sheff, an inmate at the Westchester County Jail, was burned with scalding water he was using to clean a floor. Over five months later, Sheff commenced this proceeding for leave to serve a late notice of claim on the appellant.

We agree with the appellant that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting ShefFs application for leave to serve a late notice of claim. Sheff did not seek leave to serve a late notice of claim until more than five months after the accident, and he failed to proffer any excuse for the delay *(see, Mack v City of New York,*265 AD2d 308).

Furthermore, there is no evidence that the appellant acquired actual knowledge of the facts constituting the negligent supervision claim within 90 days or a reasonable time thereafter so as to obviate any prejudice. While the appellant’s employee filled out a special report two days after the incident, the form indicated only that Sheff had burned himself. This form cannot fairly be said to have apprised the appellant of the claim that the appellant negligently failed to supervise Sheff's work *(see, Matter of Ryder v Garden City School Dist.,*277 AD2d 388).

Accordingly, the appellant had no reason to conduct a prompt investigation into the purported negligence, and it would be prejudiced if compelled to prepare a defense to the claim at this late date *(see, Matter of Morrison v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*244 AD2d 487). Given these circumstances, the Supreme Court should have denied the petition. Ritter, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
Alessandra L. MCKENZIE v. Steven M. MCKENZIE

No. 262P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 24, 2018

Steven M. McKenzie, for McKenzie, Steven M.

Regina R. Gillespie, Attorney at Law, Dobson, James R. DeMay, Attorney at Law, Concord, Alessandra L. McKenzie, for McKenzie, Alessandra L.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 21st of August 2018 by Defendant 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 24th of October 2018."
#### In the Matter of Gary FRIEDMANN.

No. 838 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

July 30, 2003.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 30th day of July, 2003, Gary Friedmann having been suspended from the practice of law in the State of New Jersey for a period of three years by Order of the Supreme Court of New Jersey dated February 3, 2003; the said Gary Friedmann having been directed on May 19, 2003, to inform this Court of any claim he has that the imposition of the identical or comparable discipline in this Commonwealth would be unwarranted and the rea*953sons therefor; and no response having been filed, it is

ORDERED that Gary Friedmann is suspended from the practice of law in this Commonwealth for a period of three years, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 193 (Thursday, October 6, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58307-58308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20046]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2005-21703; Airspace Docket No. 05-ACE-19]


Modification of Class D and Class E Airspace; Topeka, Forbes 
Field, KS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

[[Page 58308]]


ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects an error in the legal description of 
Class D airspace in a direct final rule, request for comments that was 
published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 (70 FR 
39914).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on 0901 UTC, October 27, 
2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: 
(816) 329-2524.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    Federal Register Document 2005-21703 published on Tuesday, July 12, 
2005 (70 FR 39914), modified Class D and Class E Airspace at Topeka, 
Forbes Field, KS. The phrase ``This Class D airspace area is effective 
during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice 
to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously 
published in the Airport/Facility Directory.'' was incorrectly deleted 
from the legal description of Class D airspace. This action corrects 
that error.

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the error in 
the legal description of Class D Airspace, Topeka, Forbes Field, KS as 
published in the Federal Register Tuesday July 12, 2005 (70 FR 39914), 
(FR Doc. 2005-21703), is corrected as follows:

PART 71--[CORRECTED]


Sec.  71.1  [Corrected]

    On page 39915, Column 2, at the end of the legal description of ACE 
KS D Topeka, Forbes Field, KS, add the phrase ``This Class D airspace 
area is effective during the specific dates and times established in 
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will 
thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility 
Directory.''

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on August 18, 2005.
Elizabeth S. Wallis,
Acting Area Director, Western Flight Services Operations.
[FR Doc. 05-20046 Filed 10-5-05; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4547 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4547

            To modify the definition of ``antique firearm''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 1, 2014

 Mr. Cassidy introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the 
 Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To modify the definition of ``antique firearm''.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE.

    Section 921(a)(16)(A) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
by striking ``1898'' and inserting ``1913''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986.

    Subsection (g) of section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended by striking ``1898'' each place it appears and inserting 
``1913''.
                                 <all>
```
#### In re Appeal of Decision of DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 02-PDB-043.

No. 2002-OB-2859.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 29, 2003.

In re Plaisance, Manual D.;—Plaintiff; Applying for Appeal of Decision of Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 02-PDB-043.

Leave to appeal denied.
**EXHIBIT
      32**




**CERTIFICATION**




In
      connection with the periodic report of Novint Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Tom Anderson, Chief Executive Officer
      (Principal Executive Officer) and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
      and Accounting Officer) of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof,
      solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States
      Code, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
                as
                applicable, 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
                at the dates and for the periods indicated.






Date:
      May
      15, 2008


/s/
      Tom
      Anderson


Tom
      Anderson


Chief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)


Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 10.15

                                 David Meltzer
                             11663 Spruce Run Drive
                           San Diego, California 92131



April 9, 2002


PC-EPhone, Inc.
5375 Mira Sorrento Place, Suite 290
San Diego, California  92121


To Whom It May Concern:

In reference to my employment agreement dated July 1, 2001, Exhibit A, I wish to
release PC-EPhone, Inc. from any liability in regards to the issuance to me of
stock options equivalent to 3% of all new common share issuance since July 1,
2001. These stock options are in addition to the 485,000 stock options already
issued to me.


Yours truly,

/s/ David Metlzer

David Meltzer


cc:      Miguel Figueroa
         Singer, Lewak, Greenbaum & Goldstein LLP
Exhibit 32.1

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350

I, Ashutosh Roy, the chief
executive officer of eGain Communications Corporation (the Company), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge,

(i) the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2008 the (Report), fully complies with the requirements
of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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/    ASHUTOSH
ROYAshutosh RoySeptember 29, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to eGain
Communications Corporation and will be retained by eGain Communications Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Table of Contents

EXHIBIT 8.1 SUBSIDIARIES OF BRASIL TELECOM S.A.

Subsidiaries of Brasil Telecom Participações S.A.

|                                                   |  |                              
|-------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                                 |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|Nova Tarrafa Inc.                                  |  | Cayman                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Nova Tarrafa Participações Ltda.                   |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Brasil Telecom S.A.                                |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Internet Group (Cayman) Limited                    |  | Cayman                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|BrT Serviços de Internet S.A.                      |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|14 Brasil Telecom Celular S.A.                     |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Vant Telecomunicações S.A.                         |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|MTH Ventures do Brasil Ltda.                       |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Brasil Telecom Cabos Submarinos Ltda.              |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Brasil Telecom Subsea Cable Systems (Bermuda) Ltd. |  | Bermuda                      
|                                                   |  |                              
|Brasil Telecom of America Inc.                     |  | United States                
|                                                   |  |                              
|Brasil Telecom de Venezuela S.A.                   |  | Venezuela                    
|                                                   |  |                              
|Freelance S.A.                                     |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Internet Group do Brasil S.A.                      |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Brasil Telecom Comunicação Multimidia Ltda.        |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   |  |                              
|Santa Bárbara dos Pinhais S.A.                     |  | Brazil                       

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Christopher Georges DEGAND

No. 247P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 24, 2018.

Ann B. Petersen, James R. Glover, Attorneys at Law, Chapel Hill, for Degand, Christopher Georges

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina *379***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 7th of August 2018 by Defendant 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 24th of October 2018."
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Fernandez, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 565]

Judgment, *410Supreme Court, Bronx County (Burton Hecht, J.), rendered on or about July 29, 1998, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are. no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to CPL 460.20, defendant has the right to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within thirty (30) days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the Judge or Justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other Judge or Justice.

We have considered the arguments raised by defendant in his *pro se*supplemental brief and find them to be without merit. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Andrias, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.