alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Letter of Resignation


 


 


 


 


 


		To:	netTALK .COM Inc.



 


			1080 NW 163rd Drive



 


			Florida, 33169



 


 


 


		Attn.:	Anastasios Kyriakides, Chairman of the Board and CEO



 


		Date:	April 22, 2014



 


 


 


Dear Mr. Kyriakides,


 


I Raya
Alsaigh, herewith resign from the netTALK .COM, Inc. Board of Directors effective as of 12PM today April 22, 2014.


 


 


Sincerely


 


 


/s/ Raya Alsaigh


 


Raya Alsaigh
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

Order 

November 20, 2012

145542-3

VICKI L. ZUNICH, as Personal Representative

for the Estate of STEVEN ZUNICH, and as

Next Friend for CHARLES ZUNICH and

MATTHEW ZUNICH, Minors,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 145542

COA: 297456

Midland CC: 02-005382-NH

MIDMICHIGAN MEDICAL CENTER- MIDLAND, JEFFREY S. NEWMAN, M.D.,

FAMILY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES OF

MIDLAND, P.C., a/k/a FAMILY PRACTICE

ASSOCIATES OF MIDLAND, P.C.,

KENNETH M. MACKINNON, M.D.,

JAMES H. FRYE, M.D., MIDMICHIGAN

HEALTH, and FAITH D. FUENTES, M.D.,

Defendants-Appellees. 

______________________________________/

VICKI L. ZUNICH, as Personal Representative

for the Estate of STEVEN ZUNICH, and as

Next Friend for CHARLES ZUNICH and

MATTHEW ZUNICH, Minors,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 145543

COA: 297457

Midland CC: 03-005843-NH

FAMILY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES OF

MIDLAND, P.C.,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

JERRY L. FERRELL, M.D., and ROBERTA

L. CORBAT,

Defendants.

______________________________________/
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.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

November 20, 2012

h1113

2

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 12, 2012 

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.

CAVANAGH and HATHAWAY, JJ., would grant leave to appeal.
#### MERVIN WAVE CLIP COMPANY, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Arthur M. HERSCHENSOHN, Leo Secular, Doing Business as Boston Wave Clip Company, and Helge Wibling, Doing Business as H. Wibling Tool & Mfg. Co., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 199.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 7, 1938.

H. C. Bierman, of New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.

W. Lee Helms, of New York City, for defendants-appellees.

Before L. HAND, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Decree affirmed.
##### 



Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of Corporate Property Associates 17  Global
Incorporated.
  /s/ Gordon F. DuGanGordon F. DuGanChief Executive Officer  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of Corporate Property Associates 17  Global
Incorporated.
  /s/ Mark J. DeCesarisMark J. DeCesarisacting Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, David H. Jacobson, Chief Financial Officer of Catalyst International, Inc. (the “registrant”) certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of the registrant; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 annual report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusion about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluations; and 

 

c) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

 

b) any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: March 29, 2004
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 466

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire and to convey certain

lands or interests in lands to improve the management, protection, and

administration of Colonial National Historical Park, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 11, 1995

Mr. BATEMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Resources

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire and

to convey certain lands or interests in lands to improve

the management, protection, and administration of Colonial National Historical Park, 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. The Secretary of the Interior is hereby

4 authorized to grant within the County of York, Virginia,

5 perpetual easements, or a fee simple interest in land, in6 cluding any improvements of structures, to the County of

7 York, Virginia, without any reimbursement, charge or fee,

8 subject to such conditions as are determined by the Sec-
2

HR 466 IH

1 retary to be necessary for the protection of Federal inter2 ests, for rights-of-way through, over, or under the lands

3 of Colonial National Historical Park, now or hereafter

4 acquired, for the purposes of operating sewage-disposal

5 systems.

6 SEC. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Act of

7 June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1208, 16 U.S.C. 81b et seq.),

8 limiting the average width of the Colonial Parkway, the

9 Secretary of the Interior is authorized to include within

10 the boundaries of Colonial National Historical Park and

11 acquire by donation, exchange, or purchase with donated

12 or appropriated funds, the lands or interests in lands de13 scribed as lots 30 to 48, inclusive, that portion of lot 49

14 that is 200 feet in width from the existing boundary of

15 Colonial National Historical Park, and a 3.2 acre archae16 ological site, as shown on the plats titled ‘‘Page Landing

17 At Jamestown being a subdivision of property of Neck O

18 Land Limited Partnership’’ dated June 21, 1989, Sheets

19 2 and 3 of 3 sheets and bearing National Park Service

20 Drawing Number 333.80031., and all or a portion of the

21 adjoining lot number 11 of the Neck O Land Hundred

22 Subdivision, with or without improvements.
3

HR 466 IH

1 SEC. 3. There are hereby authorized to be appro2 priated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the

3 provisions of this Act.

Æ
#### Dick Akey v. State.

No. 25593.

December 19, 1951.

Rehearing Denied February 13, 1952.

Hon. Penn J. Jackson, Judge Presiding.

*Gean B. Turner,*Cleburne, for appellant.

*641
      *George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The conviction is for the unlawful sale of whisky in a dry area, with a count in the information charging a prior conviction for an offense of like character. The punishment was assessed at a fine of $800.

Fessler, an agent of the Texas Liquor Control Board, acting as an undercover man and named in the information as the purchaser of the whisky, testified that on the 23rd day of May, 1951, at the appellant’s home, he purchased from appellant two pints of whisky, for which he paid the sum of $8.00.

It was the province of the jury to convict upon the unsupported testimony of this witness. The facts warrant the jury’s conclusion of guilt.

The construction which appellant would have us apply to his bill of exception is that the state introduced in evidence testimony showing that on the day following the offense here charged he made another sale of whisky.

In the first instance, the bill of exception fails to reflect the name of the witness by which this testimony was given. Moreover, the trial judge sustained appellant’s objection and instructed the jury not to consider such testimony.

We are unable to reach the conclusion that reversible error is reflected notwithstanding such withdrawal.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING.

WOODLEY, Judge.

Our attention is again directed to appellant’s bill of exception wherein he complains of the overruling of his motion for mistrial.

This bill reveals that an unnamed witness testified that he returned the next day and again “made a purchase from Dick Akey.” The witness did not testify what he purchased.

*642The jury having been instructed to disregard the testimony, the trial court properly declined to declare a mistrial.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.

Opinion approved by the court.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER Appellate case name: Ex Parte Dustin Wayne Glenn Appellate case number: 01 - 1 4 - 00 0 42 - CR , 01 - 14 - 00195 - CR Trial court case number: CV - 70368 , CV - 70369 Trial court: County Court at Law No. 3 of Galveston County Th ese case s w ere abated and remanded to the trial court on April 10 , 201 4 . I n the abatement order, we directed the trial court to execute certifications of appellant’s right to appeal indicating whether or not appellant, Dustin Wayne Glenn, has the right to appeal and make any other findings and recommendations the trial court deemed appropriate . The trial court clerk has filed a supplemental clerk’s record s in cause number s 01 - 14 - 00042 - CR and 01 - 14 - 00195 - CR, containing certifications of appellant’s right to appeal. Accordingly, we REINSTATE th ese case s on the Court’s active docket. Further, ap pellant has filed a motion to consolidate the above - referenced app eals and cause numbers 01 - 1 3 - 00 640 - CR and 01 - 1 3 - 00 641 - CR , contending that “it appears that all grounds for appeal are similar.” In cause numbers 01 - 13 - 00640 - CR and 01 - 13 - 00641 - CR, Glenn appeals from judgments of convictions for aggravated assault with a de adly weapon. In cause numbers 01 - 14 - 00042 - CR and 01 - 14 - 00195 - CR, Glenn appeals from the trial court’s denial of his applications for writs of habeas corpus. Glenn has filed a single brief in the four appeals. W e deny the motion to consolidate the appeals. We strike the brief filed on March 24, 2014, to the extent it was filed in cause numbers 01 - 14 - 00042 - CR and 01 - 14 - 00195 - CR . See T EX . R. A PP . P. 31.1 (providing that on receipt of record court “will

— if it desires briefs

— set the time for filing briefs”); 38.6 (providing time for filing briefs “[e]xcept in a habeas corpus or bail appeal”). If the Court determines that briefing is necessary, the Cour t will set deadlines for filing briefs. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court Date: June 10, 2014
#### G.P.K. Restaurant Enterprises, Inc., Appellant, v John Paravalos et al., Respondents.

[675 NYS2d 313]

In an action, *inter alia,*for the return of paid promissory notes, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered November 7, 1997, as, (1) upon, in effect, *451granting reargument of the plaintiffs prior motion for a preliminary injunction, adhered to the original determination in an order dated June 30, 1997, staying enforcement only of promissory notes numbered 72, 80, and 110 through 125 on condition that the plaintiff post an undertaking of $500,000, and (2) upon granting the defendants’ cross motion for partial summary judgment on its counterclaim for payment of unpaid promissory notes, is in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiff in the principal sum of $482,336.90.

Ordered that the order and judgment is modified by deleting the first decretal paragraph thereof, and substituting therefor a provision that, upon reargument, the provision of the order dated June 30, 1997, setting the amount of the undertaking to be posted by the plaintiff at $500,000 is deleted; as so modified, the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a new determination as to the amount of the undertaking.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants summary judgment with respect to 55 unpaid promissory notes. The plaintiffs claim that it tendered full payment of the amount due and owing, prior to the defendants’ invocation of the acceleration clause on the debt, is based on conclusory assertions insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment (see, *Carroll v Miller,*213 AD2d 694).

In the order dated June 30, 1997, the court granted a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of 18 additional promissory notes which the plaintiff claims to have paid, and directed the plaintiff to post a $500,000 undertaking. In the order and judgment appealed from, the court, in effect, granted reargument *(see, U-Eat-More Donut Corp. v Tedel Estates,*237 AD2d 348), but adhered to the original determination. Under the circumstances, a $500,000 undertaking was excessive. We remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a new determination as to the amount of the undertaking reflective of those damages the defendants may incur if the court determines that the preliminary injunction was erroneously granted *(see, Visual Equities v Sotheby’s, Inc.,*199 AD2d 59). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.
#### Earl McCASKILL, Appellant, v. TRINITY LUTHERAN HOSPITAL, Respondent.

No. WD 52818.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Jan. 21, 1997.

Stanley Loris Wiles, Kansas City, for Appellant.

John Robert Fox, Kansas City, for Respondent.

Before HOWARD, P.J., and BERREY and EDWIN H. SMITH, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from a denial of workers’ compensation benefits by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission.

Decision affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 442

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to retroactively restore and

make permanent the limited deduction for the health insurance costs

of self-employed individuals.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 9, 1995

Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas (for herself, Mr. SKELTON, Mr. SANDERS, Mr.

SPENCE, Mr. DICKEY, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. FORBES, Mr. GREENWOOD, Mr.

TANNER, Mr. SHAYS, Ms. HARMAN, Mr. OXLEY, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr.

BAKER of California, Mr. HASTERT, Mr. STUMP, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr.

POMEROY, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania, Mr.

BARCIA, Mr. COX of California, Mr. KOLBE, Mr. GILLMOR, Mr. EWING,

Mr. RICHARDSON, Ms. DANNER, Mr. BAKER of Louisiana, Mr. BEREUTER, Mr. BOEHLERT, Mrs. SCHROEDER, Mr. BONILLA, Mr. LEACH, and

Mr. COBURN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to retroactively

restore and make permanent the limited deduction for

the health insurance costs of self-employed individuals.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 442 IH

1 SECTION 1. DEDUCTION FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS

2 OF SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVIDUALS RESTORED

3 RETROACTIVELY AND MADE PERMANENT.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (l) of section 162 of

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special

6 rules for health insurance costs of self-employed individ7 uals) is amended by striking paragraph (6).

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

9 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

10 December 31, 1993.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Francis Gray Blinn, Appellant.

Judgment and orders affirmed on *People*v. *Conrad*(102 App. Div. 567; 182 N. Y. 529).
Court of Appeals 

First District of Texas 

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01-14-00225-CV

Shamrock Management, LLC 

v.

Dune Energy, Inc.

NO. CV-0059024-A IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO 1 OF GALVESTON COUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

RPT RECORD

CLK RECORD

FILING

STATEWIDE EFILING

$10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$8,144.00

$2,421.00

$175.00

$20.00

12/05/2014

10/29/2014

08/29/2014

08/07/2014

08/06/2014

07/14/2014

04/25/2014

04/03/2014

04/03/2014

E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

PAID

PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

APE

ANT

ANT

ANT

The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are 

$10,810.00.

Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine, Clerk of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby 
certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my 

hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the 

First District of Texas, this January 29, 2015.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MATTHEW MULLIGAN

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 22

- 1024

[ November 9 , 2022 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Martin S. Fein , Judge;

L.T. Case No. 16

- 7354CF10A and 16

- 6882 CF10A

.

Matthew Mulligan, Milton, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

W ARNER

, M A Y and L EVINE

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

FATHI ALSOOFI,

Plaintiff,

V Case No. 09-cv-12869

Hon. Robert H. Cleland

THYSSENKRUPP MATERIALS NA, INC.,

Defendant.

/

LITIGATION ASSOCIATES PLLC HONIGMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ AND COHN LLP

BERTRAM L. MARKS (P47829) RUSSELL S. LINDEN (P34863)

JASON R. KATZ (P70349) Attorneys for Defendant

Attorneys for Plaintiff 2290 First National Building

30300 Northwestern Hwy., #301 660 Woodward Avenue

Farmington Hills, MI 48334 Detroit, MI 48226-3506

(248) 932-3500 (313) 465-7466

/

STIPULATED ORDER COMPELLING DISCOVERY FROM

PLAINTIFF 

The parties having stipulated to the entry of this order and the Court being otherwise

fully advised in the premises;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that on or before November 23, 2009, Plaintiff Fathi Alsoofi

shall provide full and complete verified answers to Defendant’s interrogatories 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13,

and 15 and produce all documents responsive to Defendant’s request for production of

documents 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, including Plaintiff’s passport and record of all travels outside the

United States in 2008, which shall include the records for payment of any such travels. 

S/Robert H. Cleland

United States District Court Judge

2:09-cv-12869-RHC-MKM Doc # 22 Filed 11/24/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 275
2

Stipulated as to Entry:

/s/Bertram L. Marks/Jason R. Katz (w/permission)

Bertram L. Marks (P47829)

Jason R. Katz (P70349)

Litigation Associates PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

30300 Northwestern Hwy., Suite 301

Southfield, MI 48334

Attorneys for Plaintiff Fathi Alsoofi

(248) 932-3500

Dated: November 18, 2009

/s/Russell S. Linden

Russell S. Linden (P34863)

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP

Attorneys for Defendant

660 Woodward Avenue, Ste. 2290

Detroit, MI 48226

(313) 465-7466

Dated: November 18, 2009

DETROIT.3942804.1

2:09-cv-12869-RHC-MKM Doc # 22 Filed 11/24/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 276
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 584 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 584

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 June 8 (legislative day, June 5), 1995

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey a fish hatchery to 
                           the State of Iowa.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF THE FAIRPORT NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY TO THE 
              STATE OF IOWA.

    (a) Conveyance.--Within 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of the Interior
shall convey to the State of Iowa without reimbursement all right, 
title, and interest of the United States in and to the fish hatchery 
described in subsection (b) for use by the State for purposes of 
fishery resources management.
    (b) Hatchery Described.--The fish hatchery described in subsection 
(a) is the Fairport National Fish Hatchery located in Muscatine County, 
Iowa, adjacent to State Highway 22 west of Davenport, Iowa, including 
all real property, improvements to real property, and personal 
property.
    (c) Use and Reversionary Interest.--The property conveyed to the 
State of Iowa pursuant to this section shall be used by the State for 
purposes of fishery resources management, and if it is used for any 
other purpose all right, title, and interest in and to all property 
conveyed pursuant to this section shall revert to the United States.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 7, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```