alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Complainant, v. Daniel DONSKY, Respondent.

No. 96-SC-303-KB.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

June 20, 1996.

OPINION AND ORDER

This cause having come before the Court for review wherein the Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association adjudged the Respondent guilty of three counts of professional misconduct in his representation of a client, Mitchell Jackson, in a criminal matter pending in the Jefferson Circuit Court.

More specifically, Count one charges Respondent with violating SCR 3.130-1.3 for failure to arrange a “line-up”, for failure to obtain relevant lab tests, and for failure to make a motion for bond reduction, despite his client’s repeated request to do each.

SCR 3.130-1.3 provides “[a] lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness when representing a client.” It is alleged that Respondent’s conduct violated this rule.

Count two holds Respondent in violation of SCR 3.130-1.4(a) and (b) for failure and refusal to communicate with his client concerning the status of representation of the legal matter entrusted to him. For over a five-month period the client made numerous attempts to contact Respondent at his office and home, however Respondent refused to return client’s calls and failed to provide him information about the status of his case.

Count three charges Respondent with violation of SCR 3.130-1.16(d) for his failure to take significant action on behalf of his client and failure to refund attorney’s fee paid but unearned in the amount of $500.00.

The Kentucky Bar Association sent a certified letter containing the above charges to Respondent and its receipt shows Respondent to have received the same. Despite this notice, Respondent has failed to file an answer to the above charges and has in no way or manner tried to respond to any of the above allegations.

Upon our review of the record, we find that the evidence adequately supports the findings and recommendations of the Kentucky Bar Association, and we adopt its recommendation that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a six-month period of time to run concurrently with charges pending in 96-SC-305-KB.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

That the Respondent, Daniel Donsky, be and is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Kentucky for a period of six months, and until such further time as he is reinstated to the practice of law by order of this Court pursuant to SCR 3.510.

The Respondent is directed to pay restitution to his client in the amount of $500.00, *902and is directed to pay the costs of this action in the amount of $132.74.

Pursuant to SCR 3.390, the Respondent shall 'within ten days of the date of the entry of this order notify all clients in writing of his inability to represent them and to furnish photostatie copies of said letters of notice to the Director of the Kentucky Bar Association.

All concur.

Entered: June 20,1996.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3993

To allow depository institutions to offer negotiable order of withdrawal accounts to all businesses, to repeal the prohibition on the payment of

interest on demand deposits, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2, 1996

Mr. METCALF (for himself, Mr. MCCOLLUM, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. BAKER of

Louisiana, Mr. LAZIO of New York, and Mr. ORTON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

A BILL

To allow depository institutions to offer negotiable order

of withdrawal accounts to all businesses, to repeal the

prohibition on the payment of interest on demand deposits, 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 ‘‘Small Business Bank5 ing Act of 1996.’’.
2

•HR 3993 IH

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO SAVINGS AND DEMAND

2 DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS AT DEPOSITORY INSTI3 TUTIONS.

4 (a) NOW ACCOUNTS AUTHORIZED FOR ALL BUSI5 NESSES.—Section 2 of Public Law 93–100 (12 U.S.C.

6 1832(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows:

7 ‘‘SEC. 2. WITHDRAWALS BY NEGOTIABLE OR TRANSFER8 ABLE INSTRUMENTS FOR TRANSFERS TO

9 THIRD PARTIES.

10 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any de11 pository institution (as defined in section 3 of the Federal

12 Deposit Insurance Act) may permit the owner of any de13 posit or account on which interest or dividends are paid

14 to make withdrawals from such deposit or account by ne15 gotiable or transferable instruments for the purpose of

16 making payments to third parties.’’.

17 (b) REPEAL OF PROHIBITION ON PAYMENT OF IN18 TEREST ON DEMAND DEPOSITS.—

19 (1) Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act (12

20 U.S.C. 371a) is amended by striking subsection (i).

21 (2) The first sentence of section 5(b)(1)(B) of

22 the Home Owners’ Loan Act (12 U.S.C.

23 1464(b)(1)(B)) is amended by striking ‘‘savings as24 sociation may not—’’ and all that follows through

25 ‘‘(ii) permit any’’ and inserting ‘‘savings association

26 may not permit any’’.
3

•HR 3993 IH

1 (3) Section 18 of the Federal Deposit Insurance

2 Act (12 U.S.C. 1828) is amended by striking sub3 section (g).

Æ
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
                             EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



Effective July 1, 2001, the Agreement entered into as of September 18, 2000
between Insynq, Inc., a Delaware corporation and Stephen C. Smith, a resident
of Carlsbad, California (the "Employee) shall be amended in its entirety as to
Section 5.1 "Base Salary" and shall be as follows:

5.1  BASE SALARY.  The Employee shall receive  $2,500.00 per week for any work
performed in Tacoma, WA and a Non-qualified stock option, issued from the 2000
Long Term Incentive Plan, in the amount of 250,000 shares of common stock and
$15,000.00 salary for each filing of Form 10-KSB and a Non-qualified stock
option, issued from the 2000 Long Term Incentive Plan, in the amount of 25,000
shares of common stock for each filing of the Company's Form 10-QSB.  The
exercise prices of each stock option awarded will be the filing date of each
Form and will be immediately vested.  The $15,000.00 shall be paid in three
equal payments, $5,000.00 on the filing date and two payments of $5,000.00
each, the first to be paid 30 days from the date of filing and the second
thirty days thereafter.  In addition, the Employee shall receive net
compensation (less normal withholdings) equal to the total exercise price of
each Non-qualified stock option received paid on the date of filing.  The
Employee's compensation will be reviewed by the Chief Executive Officer and/or
Board of Directors at least quarterly.






Dated:  July 20, 2001



EMPLOYEE                               INSYNQ, INC.


/s/ Stephen C. Smith                   /s/ John P. Gorst
Stephen C. Smith                       John P. Gorst
                                       Chief Executive Officer
|   | (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:      October 27, 2010 | /s/      Bennet P. Tchaikovsky                   |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                        | Bennet      P. Tchaikovsky                       |
|                        | Chief      Financial Officer                     |
|                        | (Principal      Financial and AccountingOfficer) |

----
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DOMINIQUE BARTEET,

Appellant,

v.

WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, d/b/a CHRISTIANA 

TRUST, NOT INDIVIDUALLY, BUT AS TRUSTEE FOR PRETIUM 

MORTGAGE ACQUISITION TRUST, GEORGE JANSSEN a/k/a

GEORGE J. JANSSEN, UNKNOWN SPOUSE OF GEORGE J. JANSSEN 

a/k/a GEORGE J. JANSSEN, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BY AND 

THROUGH THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, JANART 

DEVELOPMENT, LLC, FRENCHMEN'S LANDING PROPERTY OWNER’S 

ASSOCIATION, INC., and UNKNOWN PERSON(S) IN POSSESSION OF 

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, 

Appellees.

No. 4D20-2738 and 4D21-1969

[March 10, 2022]

Consolidated appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial 

Circuit, Palm Beach County; G. Joseph Curley, Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. 

50-2017-CA-008389-XXXX-MB.

Chance McClain of the Law Office of Chance McClain, Lake Park, for 

appellant.

Adam G. Schwartz of Fox McCluskey Bush Robison PLLC, Stuart, for 

Wilmington Savings Fund, Society, FSB, d/b/a, Christiana Trust, not 

individually, but solely as Trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition 

Trust.

Robert F. Reynolds of the Law Offices of Robert F. Reynolds, P.A., Fort 

Lauderdale, for appellee Kathryn R. Janssen, as personal representative 

of the Estate of George Janssen. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
2

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
**EXHIBIT 21**

 

**LISTOF SUBSIDIARIES**

 

**Nameof 100% Owned Subsidiaries and Jurisdiction in Which Organized**

 
| 1.  | FEI Technologies  Inc. (Oregon) (established January 2007) |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2.  | FEI Electron  Optics International B.V. (Netherlands)           |
| 3.  | FEI Deutschland  GmbH (Germany)                                 |
| 4.  | FEI Company  Japan Ltd. (Japan)                                 |
| 5.  | FEI Trading  (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. (China)                        |
| 6.  | FEI Czech  Republic s.r.o. (Czech Republic)                     |
| 7.  | FEI Hong Kong  Co. Ltd. (Hong Kong)                             |
| 8.  | FEI Company of  U.S.A. (SE Asia) P.t.e. Ltd. (Singapore)        |
| 9.  | FEI Italia  S.r.l. (Italy)                                      |
| 10. | FEI Electron  Optics B.V. (Netherlands)                         |
| 11. | FEI France SAS  (France)                                        |
| 12. | FEI Europe B.V. (Netherlands)                                   |
| 13. | FEI UK Ltd.  (United Kingdom)                                   |
| 14. | FEI Systems  Canada Inc. (Canada)                               |
| 15. | FEI Europe Ltd.  (United Kingdom)                               |

 

**Nameof Subsidiaries less than 100% Owned**

 
| 1. | Charged Particle  Beam Technology Latin America S.A. de C.V. (Mexico) |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | FEI Systems  (Thailand) Company, Limited (Thailand)                   |

 

----
Exhibit 32.1(a)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

(ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

In connection with the report of Dynegy Holdings Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bruce A. Williamson, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof,
solely for the 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: February 28, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/    BRUCE A.
WILLIAMSON                 
|                        |  |     |  | Bruce A. Williamson Chief Executive Officer
_______________________________________ __ Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 21, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh 128272 Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices

v SC: 128272 COA: 256117 Iosco CC: 01-004288-FH RICHARD ALAN GREEN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 25, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY , J., would grant leave to appeal.

s0914 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.

September 21, 2005

Clerk
#### ACE CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING CO., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant/Respondent.

No. 70070.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Oct. 15, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Dec. 17,1996.

Application to Transfer Denied Jan. 21,1997.

Lawrence Joseph Altman, Clayton, for plaintiff/appellant.

Stephen Joseph Kovac, St. Louis, for defendant/respondent.

Before CRAHAN, P.J., GRIMM and HOFF, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals the summary judgment and dismissal of related counts in its action challenging the rezoning of its property. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
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 on Form 10-Q (the  "Report")  of CH4
Energy,  Inc.  (the  "Company")  for the  quarter  ended  June 30,  2008,  James
Fitzsimons,  the President and CFO of the Company,  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 the best of the  undersigned's  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.


Date: August 19, 2008                        /s/ James Fitzsimons
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             James Fitzsimons, President and CFO
```
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 9, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 36069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17389]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 
Scientific and Technical Meetings on Occupational Exposure to Asphalt 
During Roofing and Paving Operations: Correction

Federal Register Citations of Previous Announcements: 61 FR 28590-
28591--dated June 5, 1996, and 61 FR 30242--dated June 14, 1996.

SUMMARY: Notice is given that the purpose of these meetings on July 8-
10, 1996, and July 22-24, 1996, has been restructured to address only 
those issues relevant to the control of asphalt exposures (e.g., 
engineering controls, work practices). The draft NIOSH ``Working Paper 
on Occupational Exposure to Asphalt'' will not be discussed at these 
meetings. The meeting times, dates, place, and status remain unchanged.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Diane Manning, NIOSH Docket 
Office, 4676 Columbia Parkway, M/S C-34, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226.

    Dated: July 2, 1996.
Carolyn J. Russell,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 96-17389 Filed 7-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-19-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 9, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 36053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17409]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Project No. 2482-021]


Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation; Notice of Availability of Final 
Environmental Assessment

July 2, 1996.
    A final environmental assessment (FEA) is available for public 
review. The FEA was prepared for an application filed by Niagara Mohawk 
Power Corporation (licensee) to remove polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 
from lands within the boundary of the Hudson River Hydroelectric 
Project. The licensee proposes to remove PCBs at the Queensbury site in 
accordance with a record of decision issued March 1995 by the New York 
State Department of Environmental Conservation. In summary, the 
licensee proposes to excavate and remove all surface soil (1 foot from 
surface) on the upland portion of the site with total PCB 
concentrations in excess of 1 ppm and subsurface soil with 
concentrations in excess of 10 ppm. Further, the licensee proposes to 
excavate and remove to a depth of 2 feet near-shore river sediments. 
The Queensbury site is located on Corinth Road, Town of Queensbury, 
Warren County, New York, on the north bank of the Hudson River, about 5 
miles west of Glens Falls, New York.
    The FEA finds that the licensee's remediation plan is not a major 
federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment. The FEA was written by staff in the Office of Hydropower 
Licensing, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Copies of the FEA can 
be obtained by calling the Commission's Public Reference Room at (202) 
208-1371.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-17409 Filed 7-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 149 (Friday, August 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 45027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17691]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1773-DR]


Missouri; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Missouri (FEMA-1773-DR), dated June 25, 2008, and 
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: July 25, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Missouri is hereby amended to include the following 
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by 
the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of June 25, 2008.

    Audrain, Carroll, Chariton, Christian, Howard, Macon, Miller, 
Morgan, Pettis, Ray, Shelby, and Sullivan Counties for Public 
Assistance. Linn, Stone, Taney, and Vernon Counties for Public 
Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance.)
    Nodaway County for Public Assistance (already designated for 
Individual Assistance and emergency protective measures [Category 
B], limited direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance 
program.)
    Cape Girardeau County for Public Assistance (already designated 
for emergency protective measures [Category B], limited direct 
Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.)

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared 
Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and 
Households; 97.050 Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to 
Individuals and Households--Other Needs, 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, 
Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-17691 Filed 7-31-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P