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

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136222 & (22)(23) 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: 136222 

 COA: 279139 

Oakland CC: 2003-190459-FH 

KALVIN LAMAR WASHINGTON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 20, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand and the motion for miscellaneous relief are DENIED. 

s1020 

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. 

October 27, 2008 

 Clerk
In the MATTER OF: R.W.

No. COA 18-172

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 3, 2018

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1CERTIFICATIONSI, Stephen R. Kerrigan, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Coinmach Service Corp.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 

 
 a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date: November 8, 2006 /s/ Stephen R. Kerrigan   Stephen R. Kerrigan   Chief Executive Officer
#### Michael A. FALANA, Appellant, v. James CROSBY, Secretary, Department of Corrections, Appellee.

No. 1D03-1581.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 21, 2003.

Appellant, pro se.

Louis A. Vargas, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, and Charlie Crist, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellant’s response to this Court’s June 10, 2003 order, *230and finding that the notice of appeal was not timely filed, the appeal is hereby dismissed as untimely.

ERVIN, PADOVANO and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 12.1

         Statement Regarding Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(1)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           Year         Year        Year        Mar. 18,       Jan. 1,        Year        Year
                                          Ended        Ended        Ended        1994 -         1994 -       Ended        Ended
                                         Dec. 31 ,    Dec. 31,     Dec. 31,     Dec. 31,       Mar. 17,     Dec. 31,     Dec. 31,
                                           1997         1996         1995         1994           1994         1993        1992
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                      <C>         <C>          <C>         <C>             <C>          <C>         <C>
 Income (loss) before income taxes        $ (6,218)   $ 11,969     $  6,923       $ 9,585      $ 2,857     $ 13,169     $ 12,409


 Interest
                                             9,091       9,517        9,607         6,867          115          924          794


 Interest portion of rental expense
                                               646         714          645           237           24          398          296


 Amortization of debt expenses
                                               456         376          376           264            -            -            -
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Earnings                                $   3,975    $ 22,576     $ 17,551      $ 16,953     $  2,996     $ 14,491     $ 13,499
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Fixed charges                           $  10,193    $ 10,607     $ 10,628      $  7,368     $    139     $  1,322     $  1,090
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Ratio                                         0.4         2.1          1.7           2.3         21.6         11.0         12.4
                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>


 (1)    All dollars in thousands.




                                       95
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United
States Code), the undersigned officer of Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify that:



The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the
requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Dated: February 28, 2008 |  | /s/    L. Kevin Kelly  
|                         |  | L. Kevin Kelly         
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer
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.                  

###### Legal Services Corporation

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia Batie, Manager of Board Operations, at (202) 295-1500.

# Special Needs:

Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend the meeting may notify Patricia Batie at (202) 295-1500.

Dated: October 4, 2005.

Victor M. Fortuno,

Vice President for Legal Affairs, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary.

[FR Doc. 05-20192 Filed 10-4-05; 12:10 pm]

BILLING CODE 7050-01-P
Carla MIDGETTE, BY GEICO, Subrogee, Plaintiff, v. Arnel M. CONCEPCION, Defendant.

No. COA17-1230

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

AFFIRMED.
================================================================================

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  Mondial  Ventures,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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.


Date:  August 11, 2006


/s/ Scott Taylor
----------------------------------
Scott Taylor, President and C.E.O.
(Principal Executive Officer)
JONES v. CRANFORD

80P18-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Darron J. Jones, for Jones, Darron J.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th of April 2018 by Plaintiff for Objection:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."
REGENCY CENTERS ACQUISITION, LLC v. CRESCENT ACQUISITIONS, LLC

134A18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 12, 2018

Mark E. Anderson, Attorney at Law, Tracy S. DeMarco, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Regency Centers Acquisitions, LLC.

Kiran H. Mehta, Attorney at Law, Sara S. Ash, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Crescent Acquisitions, LLC.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 11th of June 2018 by Plaintiff:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of June 2018."

Plaintiff shall have up to and including the 13th day of July 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

YANAN FANG,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 73043 Agency No. A201

- 208

- 875

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted October 15, 2019 **

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Yanan Fang , a native and citizen of China , petition s for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals ’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s
(“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252

. We review for substan tial evidence the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

OCT 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 73043

agency’s factual findings. Garcia

- Milian v. Holder , 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir.
2014)

. We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Fang failed to

establish that any harm he suffered or fears in China was or would be on account
of his political opinion

. See Lkhagvasuren v. Lynch , 849 F.3d 800 , 80 2

- 03 (9th

Cir. 20 16 ) ( discussing three

- factor test set forth by Matter of N

- M

- , 25 I. & N. Dec.
526, 532

- 33 (BIA 2011) for determining whether retaliation for whistleblowing
constitutes persecution on account of political opinion) ; Pagayon v. Holder , 675
F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2011) (a perso nal dispute, standing alone, does not
constitute persecution based on a protected ground)

. Thus, Fang’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail

. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Fang failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured by or with
the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to China. See Aden v.

Holder , 589 F. 3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009)

. To the extent Fang contends that the IJ was biased , we reject this contention

as without merit

.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JANNIFER THOMAS,

Appellant,

v.

ST. LUCIE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-3222

[November 29, 2018]

Appeal from the State of Florida, Division of Administrative Hearings; 

DOAH Case No. 16-5872TTS.

Thomas L. Johnson of the Law Offices of Thomas Johnson, Brandon, 

for appellant.

Glen J. Torcivia and Matthew L. Ransdell of Torcivia, Donlon, 

Goddeau & Ansay, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

TAYLOR, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
STATE of North Carolina v. Jesse Dean HOPPES

No. COA17-861

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

NO ERROR.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 21

- 00162

- CV

K EANA P RESCOD AND S HELLEY

H ARTE

, Appellants

V

.

S UZANNAH T KACH , Appellee §

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 393rd Distr i ct

Court

of Denton County ( 18

- 10539

- 393 )

January 27, 2022

Memorandum Opinion by Justice

Birdwell

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered tha t the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appellants Keana Prescod and Shelley Harte shall pay

all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

Ju stice Wade Birdwell
#### Ella Mae AUTMAN v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, et al.

No. 2003-C-1348.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 2003.

In re Autman, Ella Mae; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 00-1671; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,-981-CA.

Denied.
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the annual report of Infosmart Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Po Nei Sze, Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial 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, 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 Company at the dates
and for the periods indicated.




Date:
      April 30, 2009
              
              /s/
      Po Nei SzePo
      Nei SzeChief
      Financial Officer
                (Principal
      Financial Officer)




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
(January 9, 2001)

#### Alberto Gaudino et al., Respondents, v 511 West 232nd Street Owners Corp., Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 39]

Order, *273Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Friedman, J.), entered on or about November 29, 1999, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted and the complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant-appellant dismissing the complaint.

This is a personal injury action arising out of plaintiff Alberto Gaudino’s alleged slip and fall on the public sidewalk abutting 511 West 232nd Street, Bronx, New York (the premises). The premises are owned and maintained by defendant 511 West 232nd Street Owners Corp. (Owners Corp.).

Plaintiff testified at an examination before trial held on March 6, 1998 that: the accident occurred at approximately 10:00 a.m. on March 8, 1996; the weather at the time was cloudy and cold; white snow was on the ground where he fell, which had not been shoveled; he did not observe anyone shoveling snow either prior to, or at the time of, the accident; the snow caused him to fall; and he had no idea how long the snow was there or how deep it was. Plaintiff, in a subsequent affidavit, averred that the snow had not been “shoveled, sanded, chipped away or cleared by the defendant” and acknowledged that the conditions at the time of the accident were “snow-like,” which he believed was caused by wind-blown snow. Local weather reports and climatological data submitted by defendant indicate that 3.3 inches of snow fell on the day of plaintiffs accident and that at least some snow fell each hour between 3:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., commencing well before and ending well after plaintiffs accident.

It is settled that the owner or lessee of property owes no duty to pedestrians to remove ice or snow that naturally accumulates on the sidewalk in front of its premises, although if it does so endeavor, it can be held liable in negligence where its acts create or increase the hazards inherent in those conditions *(see, Jiuz v City of New York,*244 AD2d 298; *Keane v City of New York,*208 AD2d 457).

In this matter, from plaintiff’s own testimony, it is clear that no effort had been made by defendant to remove the snow which had accumulated the day before and was continuing to accumulate on the day and at the time that plaintiff fell. There is also no evidence that defendant in any way created or increased a dangerous condition on the abutting sidewalk. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Tom and Lerner, JJ.
#### Shanna DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D01-5024.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 20, 2003.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Marcy K. Allen, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jeanine M. Germanowicz, *916Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

SHAHOOD, J.

Shanna Davis, convicted of aggravated assault for threatening the victim with a motor vehicle, appeals her sentence. The issue presented in this appeal is whether it is unlawful for the trial court to sentence appellant to a harsher sentence after she rejected a court initiated plea offer to a less severe sanction.

Appellant argues that the trial court’s imposition of a harsher sentence than that offered during plea negotiations was unlawful because the totality of the circumstances gave rise to a presumption of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing. Appellee maintains the sentence was lawful in that there was evidence presented at the sentencing hearing to support the trial court’s imposition of the harsher sentence.

The Florida Supreme Court recently announced in *Wilson v. State,*845 So.2d 142, 156 (Fla.2003), that in cases where a trial judge participates in plea negotiations and the defendant thereafter receives a harsher sentence, a presumption of vindictiveness, which shifts the burden to the state to produce affirmative evidence dispelling judicial vindictiveness in sentencing, may arise.

Based on the record in this ease, specifically the evidence presented at the sentencing hearing, we hold that although a presumption of vindictiveness in sentencing arose, this presumption was sufficiently dispelled to warrant affirmance in this case.

AFFIRMED.

POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ„ concur.