alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1056 CAF 11-00898 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, FAHEY, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTY BRAZIE, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FLORENCE ZENISEK, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

PAUL M. DEEP, UTICA, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

EDWARD G. KAMINSKI, UTICA, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

JOHN T. NASCI, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, ROME, FOR CARI B., JERREMY B. AND MCKENNA B.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Brian M. Miga, J.H.O.), entered February 10, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8. The order, among other things, directed respondent to stay away from petitioner.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the petition is dismissed.
Memorandum: Respondent, the fiancé of petitioner’s estranged husband, appeals from an order of protection entered in favor of petitioner and her children. Petitioner concedes that she failed to meet her burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent committed the family offense of reckless endangerment, and we agree with respondent that petitioner also failed to meet her burden of proof with respect to the remaining offenses, i.e., disorderly conduct, harassment in the second degree and aggravated harassment in the second degree ( see Family Ct Act § 812 [1]; Penal Law §§ 240.20, 240.26, 240.30; see also Matter of Marquardt v Marquardt , 97 AD3d 1112, 1113-1114).
The offense of disorderly conduct was not established because there was no evidence that respondent intended “to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creat[ed] a risk thereof” (Penal Law § 240.20 [emphasis added]). The offenses of harassment in the second degree and aggravated harassment in the second degree were not established because the evidence failed to show that respondent — by arguing with her fiancé and making threats against him and petitioner — intended to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm petitioner, who was not present when the argument occurred.-2- 1056 CAF 11-00898
Although petitioner later listened to a recording of the argument that had been left as a message on her telephone, there is no evidence that respondent knew that her fiancé had called petitioner during the argument and that her threats were being recorded on petitioner’s telephone. We thus conclude that Family Court erred in failing to dismiss the petition ( see Marquardt , 97 AD3d at 1113; see generally Matter of Woodruff v Rogers , 50 AD3d 1571, 1571-1572, lv denied 10 NY3d 717). Because we conclude that petitioner failed to establish that respondent committed a family offense, we need not reach respondent’s remaining contention.

Entered: October 5, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

May 12, 2015

Order 

May 12, 2015

150549(95)

ANDREW J. PERUN, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

TROTT & TROTT, P.C., and CITIMORTGAGE,

INC.,

Defendants-Appellees.

SC: 150549

COA: 315191

Macomb CC: 2012-004203-CK

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of plaintiff-appellant to extend the time 

for filing a supplement in support of the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED IN 

PART. The supplement will be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before June 

30, 2015, not July 30, 2015 as requested.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2629 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2629

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 114 Ridge Street in Lenoir, North Carolina, as the ``James T. 
                    Broyhill Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 24, 2000

   Mr. Helms introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
           referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 114 Ridge Street in Lenoir, North Carolina, as the ``James T. 
                    Broyhill Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. JAMES T. BROYHILL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 114 Ridge Street in Lenoir, North Carolina, shall be known 
and designated as the ``James T. Broyhill Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.-- Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``James T. Broyhill Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2189

To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 147.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7, 2000

Mr. EDWARDS (for himself and Mr. HELMS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 147.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON PIG4 MENT YELLOW 147.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.32.00 Pigment Yellow

147 (CAS No.

4118–16–5)

(provided for in

subheading

3204.17.60) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.
2

•S 2189 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1




               Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
(Form S-8 No. 33-16525) pertaining to the Physiometrix, Inc. 1991 Stock Plan, 
1996 Director Option Plan, and 1996 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of our 
report dated February 4, 1999, with respect to the financial statements of 
Physiometrix, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year 
ended December 31, 1998.

                                                        /s/
                                                 ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 31, 1999
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Yahoo! Inc. (the Company) for the year
ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Marissa A. Mayer, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Ken Goldman, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of her or his 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 Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ MARISSA A. MAYER
|Name:                |  | Marissa A. Mayer       
|Title:               |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Dated:               |  | September 17, 2013     
|                    
|/s/ KEN GOLDMAN     
|Name:                |  | Ken Goldman            
|Title:               |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Dated:               |  | September 17, 2013     

The foregoing certification is being furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and it is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________
No. 23

- 13634
Non

- Argument Calendar

____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus DESHUNQUEZ ALEXANDER HARRIS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 2:22

- cr

- 00165

- LSC

- JTA

- 1

____________________ USCA11 Case: 23-13634 Document: 25-1 Date Filed: 04/23/2024 Page: 1 of 22 Opinion of the Court 23

- 13634

Before W ILSON , L UCK , and A NDERSON , Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED. See United States v. Bushert , 997 F.2d 1343, 1351 (11th Cir. 1993) (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Boyd , 975 F.3d 1185, 1192 (11th Cir. 2020) (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced where “it was clearly conveyed to the defendant that he was giving up his right to appeal under most c ircumstances” (quotation marks and brackets omitted)) ; see also United States v. Howle , 166 F.3d 1166, 1169 (11th Cir. 1999) (a sentence appeal waiver waives difficult and debatable legal issues, including even blatant error); United States v. Bascomb
, 451 F.3d 1292, 1296

– 97 (11th Cir. 2006) ( an appeal waiver may include a waiver of constitutional claims ). USCA11 Case: 23-13634 Document: 25-1 Date Filed: 04/23/2024 Page: 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AND EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(b)
  (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. of the
Company.
 Date: August 5, 2005
    
    /s/ Thomas J. DepenbrockThomas J. DepenbrockChief Financial OfficerNS Group, Inc.
96th Congress, 2d Session House Document Xo. 9O-2S0

VETO OF H.R. 5235

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OE THE UNITED STATES

VETOING

H.R. 5235, AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 5 OF TITLE 37, UNITED

STATES CODE, TO REVISE THE SPECIAL PAY PROVISIONS FOR

CERTAIN HEALTH PROFESSIONALS IN THE UNIFORMED

SERVICES

March 11, 1980.— Message and accompanying act ordered to be printed

59-011 o

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1980
To the House of Representatives:

I am returning, without my approval, H.R. 5235, the Uniformed Services Health Professionals Special Pay Act of 1980. In recent years, the Department of Defense has experienced increas­ ing difficulty in retaining its physicians, particularly those who have achieved board certification in specialty areas. In order to alleviate the military physician shortage, the Administration proposed the Armed Forces Physicians Pay Act in April of 1979. The principal focus of this proposal was to increase selectively the special and bonus pay necessary to attract and retain the required number of military physicians during what is expected to be a temporary period of shortage. Unfortunately, in considering the issue of special pay for military physicians, the Congress unnecessarily expanded the scope and costs of H.R. 5235 to such an extent that I find it unacceptable. Specifically, the bill contains a number of flaws in comparison to the Administra­ tion bill. —It makes bonus pay permanent, instead of temporary ; —It covers medical doctors in other uniformed services, principally the Public Health Service, instead of just those in the Armed Forces; —It includes dentists, optometrists, and podiatrists, in addition to physicians; —It provides unduly generous bonuses; and —It makes permanent the special pay for veterinarians. Only in the Armed Forces are we experiencing a serious shortage of physicians. The Administration proposal was very carefully tailored to solve that problem while preserving the flexibility to re-examine physician pay in the future as conditions change. There is no justifica­ tion for making bonus pay permanent and for expanding coverage to physicians outside the military and to other health professionals (dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, and veterinarians). Moreover, such an expansion, when compared to the Administration proposal, would increase Federal spending by some $170 million for the years through 1985. If we are to check the strong inflationary pres­ sures that now prevail throughout the Nation’s economy, we must exercise genuine restraint in Federal spending. H.R. 5235 is a good example, in my judgment, of the type of unjustified Federal largess that we must stop if the Budget is to be balanced and inflation brought under control. While I am compelled to disapprove H.R. 5235, let me emphasize my commitment to alleviate the shortage of physicians in the Armed Forces. I urge the Congress to reconsider the Administration proposal ns soon as possible. That proposal is designed to resolve the problem in a fiscally responsible manner.

Jim m y Carter.

The W h it e H o use, March 11, 1980.
# Senators Who Received the Medal of Honor

**

----

The Medal of Honor is the highest award that can be given to U.S. military personnel. To date, only seven U.S. senators have received it.

        -  Contact 
        -  Leadership & Officers 
        -  Former Senators 
        -  Qualifications & Terms of Service 
        -  Facts & Milestones 
        -  States 

### Related Links 

Congressional Medal of Honor Society

U.S. Army Center of Military History on Medal of Honor
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2576

To suspend temporarily the duty on Bromoxynil Octanoate technical.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 17, 2000

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Bromoxynil Octanoate

technical.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.29.01 3,5-dibromo-4-

hydoxybenzonitril

(CAS No. 1689–

99–2) (provided

for in subheading

2926.90.25) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2003 ’’.
2

•S 2576 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 this section applies with respect to goods entered, or with3 drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the

4 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Exhibit 10(e)
-------------

                              2001 AMENDMENT TO THE
                           DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION PLAN


         This 2001 Amendment to the Director Stock Option Plan (the "Plan") is
made effective as of June 6, 2001.

         Section 5.1 of the Plan shall be amended to read as follows:

                  "5.1 The aggregate number of shares that may be issued under
                  options granted pursuant to the Plan shall not exceed 680,000
                  shares."

         All provisions of the Plan not specifically mentioned in this 2001
Amendment shall be considered modified to the extent necessary to be consistent
with the changes made in this Amendment.

                                       FPIC INSURANCE GROUP, INC.

                                       By:______________________________________
                                       Its:  President and Chief Executive
                                             Officer
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 21

- 00213

- CR

Javier Casas v. The State of Texas

On Appeal from the 214th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 17FC

- 4706F

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cau se on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed

. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. February 24 , 2022
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 7, 2023

NO. 03-21-00310-CV

Timothy Daniel Caballero, Appellant

v.

Caroline Ann Bonneville, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND THEOFANIS

DISMISSED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on June 3, 2021. Having reviewed the 

record, the Court holds that the record does not show a basis on which this Court can exercise 

jurisdiction, and that Timothy Daniel Caballero did not comply with a notice from the Clerk of 

this Court to file a letter explaining the basis for this Court’s jurisdiction. Further, he has not 

prosecuted this appeal by filing any documents, including a brief, after the clerk’s record was 

filed in September 2021. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction, 

failure to respond to a notice from the clerk requiring a response within a specified time, and 

want of prosecution. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of 

costs is made.
Order entered June 30, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00764-CV

IN RE JORGE BARROQUIN, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 292nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1353472

ORDER

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus. We ORDER relator to bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ DOUGLAS S. LANG 

JUSTICE
**Exhibit
23**
 
  **CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM**
 
  
 We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-3 (No. 333-116495, No. 333-116495-01, No. 333-115352, No.
333-115352-01, No. 333-115352-02 and No. 333-83835) and on Form S-8 (No.
333-72601, No. 333-72599, No. 333-09365 and No. 333-09375) of FPIC Insurance
Group, Inc. of our report dated March 15, 2005 relating to the financial
statements, financial statement schedules, management’s assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form
10-K.
 
 **PricewaterhouseCoopers
      LLP**
 
  Jacksonville,
Florida
 March
15, 2005
#### Marx Ottinger v. John R. Bennett. National Park Bank v. Henry B. Billings. William J. Logan v. Greenwich Trust Company. Manufacturers Commercial Company v. August Heckscher.

Motions granted. Questions certified.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT**

March 14, 2006

U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission450 Fifth Street, N. W.Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies andGentlemen:

The certification set forth below is being submitted tothe Securities and Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying withSection 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United StatesCode. This certification is not to be deemed to be filed pursuant to theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and does not constitute a part of the AnnualReport on Form 10-K (the “Report”) accompanying this letter.

I, James V.Iaco, the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of MirantCorporation (the “Company”), certify that, subject to the qualifications notedbelow, to the best of my knowledge:

1.                the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operation of Mirant Corporation.
| Name:  | /s/ JAMES V. IACO                                                 |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | *Executive Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer* |   |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Mirant Corporation and will beretained by Mirant Corporation and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

----
EX-4.13









EXHIBIT 4.13




CONSENT OF EXPERT




     I, Jinhui Liu, hereby consent to the inclusion and incorporation by reference in this
Registration Statement on Form F-8 of Silvercorp Metals Inc. (the “Registration Statement”) of
references to and information derived from the technical report entitled “Technical Report on
Gaocheng Ag-Zn-Pb Project, and Shimentou Au-Ag-Zn-Pb Project, Guangdong Province, People’s Republic
of China” dated April 30, 2008 (the “Incorporated Information”). I also consent to the reference
to my name and to my involvement in the preparation of the Incorporated Information in this
Registration Statement.



	 	 	 
	  /s/ Jinhui Liu
 

Name: Jinhui Liu

	 	 






June 15, 2009
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2051

To revise the boundaries of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area,

and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 10, 2000

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. BOXER) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To revise the boundaries of the Golden Gate National

Recreation Area, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Golden Gate National

5 Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment Act of 2000.’’

6 SEC. 2. ADDITIONS TO THE GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL

7 RECREATION AREA.

8 Section 2(a) of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to establish

9 the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in the State

10 of California, and for other purposes’’ (16 U.S.C. 460bb–
2

•S 2051 IS

1 1(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The

2 recreation area shall also include the land generally de3 picted on the map entitled ‘Additions to Golden Gate Na4 tional Recreation Area’, numbered NPS–80,073 and dated

5 January, 2000/PWR–PLRPC. All transactions concerning

6 the Golden Gate National Recreation Area shall involve

7 willing sellers and willing buyers.’’.

Æ