alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 10, 2021

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

________________ No. 3D21

- 70 Lower Tribunal No s

. 18

- 16267 CC, 19

- 307 AP

________________ 

### Jared Lopez , Appellant,

vs. 

### Dominic Cavagnuolo , et al. , Appellee s

.

An Appeal from the C ounty Court for Miami

- Dade County, Gina Beovides , Judge. Law Offices of Paul Morris, P.A., and Paul Morris; Black, Srebnick, Kornspan & Stumpf, P.A., a nd Jared Lopez and Robert T. Dunlap , for appellant. Law Offices of Anthony Accetta , P.A., and Anthony Accetta ; Law Office of Lazaro Vazquez, P.A., and Lazaro Vazquez, for appellee s

.
Before EMAS, MILLER and LOBREE , JJ. EMAS, J

.2 Jared L opez, Esq uire , counsel for plaintiff below, appeals a final judgment awarding attorney’s fees against him as a sanction pursu ant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2020)

. Upon our review of the record, we affirm, and hold that the trial court committed no error in its determination that defendants were the prevailing party following the filing of a notice of voluntary dismissa l, nor did the trial
court abuse its discretion in its determination of the amount and reasonableness of the attorney’s fees to be award ed

. See Lanson v. Reid , 314 So. 3d 385 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) ( affirming sanctions under section 57.105 and noting that an “award of attorney’s fees is a matter committed to sound judicial discretion which will not be disturbed on appeal, absent a showing of clear abuse of discretion ”); Preferred Gov’t Ins. Trust v. Aelion , 307 So. 3d 129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020); Sec

. Pac

. Credit Corp. v. Oasis Plaza Corp. , 714 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)

. See also Yampol v. Schindler Elevator Corp ., 186 So. 3d 616 , 617 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (noting that, in Thornber v. City of Fort Walton Beach , 568 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 1990), the Florida Sup reme Court established the general rule that “when a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses an action, the defendant is the prevailing party” and further noting “the Thornber Court did not exempt from its scope voluntary3 dismissals without prejudice”) (additional citations omitted)

. We reject without discussion the remaining claims raised by appellant. As for any concern that this court’s disposition w ill have a preclusive effect on the pending dissociation claim in the circuit court ( lower tribunal

c ase number 18

- 25431), we note that the sanctions order on appeal in the instant case was premised on facts which are independent of and unrelated to th at pending circuit court claim, and further note that pending circuit court claim is being pursued by a third party, Mark Iacono, and not by L24M, LLC. Affirmed.
207 *La.*1089

#### CITY OF GRETNA v. ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 37829.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 30, 1945.

Rehearing Denied June 5, 1945.

Lemle, Moreno & Lemle, of New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

Andrew H. Thalheim, City Atty., of Gretna, for plaintiff-appellee.

FOURNET, Justice.

Our decision in the case of City of Gret-na v.' Aetna Life Insurance Company, 22 So.2d 658, handed down today, is determinative of the issues raised in this case, for they are identical.

For the reasons assigned, it.is ordered that this appeal be and it is hereby transferred to the Court of Appeal for the Parish of Orleans, such transfer to be made within sixty days after this judgment becomes final, and, if not so made, this appeal to be deemed dismissed. The defendant-appellant is to pay all costs of the appeal in this court; all remaining costs to await the final determination of this matter.
FORM OF CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14 AND 15D-14
              UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED
                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Marie M. May, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of HomeLife, Inc.;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
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 Quarterly Report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 45 days of the filing date of this Quarterly
Report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

(c) presented in this Quarterly Report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
Quarterly Report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: Jnauary 17, 2006                          /s/ Marie M. May
                                                ----------------
                                                Name: Marie M. May
                                                Title: Chief Financial Officer
B.6. Distribution of Agricultural Banks by the Share of Their Total Loans that are Nonperforming

Percent

Less than 20.0 percent

2.0 2.0-4.9 5.0-9.9 10.0-14.9 15.0-19.9 and

Period Total percent percent percent percent percent over

1996...... 100.0 81.9 15.4 2.3 .2 .1 .1

1997...... 100.0 84.5 12.9 2.5 .1 .1 .0

1998...... 100.0 81.7 15.1 2.8 .3 ... .1

1999...... 100.0 84.8 12.6 2.4 .3 .0 ...

2000...... 100.0 85.0 12.8 1.8 .3 ... ...

2001...... 100.0 80.0 17.3 2.5 .1 .0 ...

2002...... 100.0 79.7 17.1 2.8 .2 .1 ...

2003...... 100.0 81.2 15.0 3.3 .4 .1 .0

2004...... 100.0 85.3 12.7 1.7 .2 .1 ...

2005...... 100.0 87.2 10.7 1.9 .2 ... ...

2006...... 100.0 86.8 11.5 1.6 .0 .0 ...

2007...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

 Q3... 100.0 80.3 16.2 3.1 .3 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 81.7 15.1 2.8 .3 ... .1

1999: Q1... 100.0 77.2 17.8 4.5 .5 .0 .0

 Q2... 100.0 78.7 16.9 3.8 .6 ... ...

 Q3... 100.0 80.4 15.9 3.4 .3 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 84.8 12.6 2.4 .3 .0 ...

2000: Q1... 100.0 81.8 14.8 2.9 .5 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 82.2 15.1 2.4 .3 .0 .0

 Q3... 100.0 83.0 14.9 1.7 .4 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 85.0 12.8 1.8 .3 ... ...

2001: Q1... 100.0 80.3 16.9 2.6 .2 .1 ...

 Q2... 100.0 80.2 16.6 3.0 .2 .1 ...

 Q3... 100.0 78.7 17.8 3.2 .3 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 80.0 17.3 2.5 .1 .0 ...

2002: Q1... 100.0 76.8 19.3 3.7 .2 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 76.8 19.6 3.1 .4 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 77.8 18.8 3.2 .2 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 79.7 17.1 2.8 .2 .1 ...

2003: Q1... 100.0 75.4 19.9 4.1 .3 .2 .0

 Q2... 100.0 76.2 19.2 4.0 .4 .1 .1

 Q3... 100.0 77.7 18.3 3.6 .3 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 81.2 15.0 3.3 .4 .1 .0

2004: Q1... 100.0 79.2 17.2 3.2 .2 .1 .0

 Q2... 100.0 81.3 15.1 3.2 .3 .0 .1

 Q3... 100.0 82.1 15.1 2.4 .2 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 85.3 12.7 1.7 .2 .1 ...

2005: Q1... 100.0 84.4 13.3 2.0 .2 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.7 12.0 2.0 .3 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 85.7 12.4 1.8 .1 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 87.2 10.7 1.9 .2 ... ...

2006: Q1... 100.0 85.6 12.6 1.7 .1 ... ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.8 12.5 1.5 .1 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 85.9 12.5 1.5 .0 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 86.8 11.5 1.6 .0 .0 ...

2007: Q1... 100.0 84.9 12.9 2.0 .1 ... ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.2 12.2 2.5 .1 ... ...

 Q3... 100.0 83.6 14.1 2.1 .0 .0 .0

 Note. Nonperforming loans are loans in nonaccruing status or past due 90 days or more. Renegotiated or restructured

loans in compliance with the modified terms are not included. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section B.

Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.

 ... Not applicable.

26
Exhibit 99.2


                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. 1350,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection with the Quarterly Report of AEI Income  &  Growth
Fund  XXII Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-QSB
for  the  period  ended March 31, 2003,  as  filed  with  the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on  the  date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer of AEI Fund
Management  XXI,  Inc.,  the  Managing  General  Partner  of  the
Partnership,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  1350,  as  adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Partnership.


                           /s/ Patrick W. Keene
                               Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer
                               AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc.
                               Managing General Partner
                               May 12, 2003
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 the Quarterly Report of EFJ, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Michael E. Jalbert, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Michael E. JalbertMichael E. JalbertChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)


August 1, 2007
|   | 1) | the                  Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or                  15(d) 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. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                               |                                     |                                         |
|------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                               |                                     |
|                          |                                |                                    |
| Date:                July 29, 2005 | By:                            | /s/ Stephen                R. Anastasio |
|                               | Stephen                R. Anastasio      |
|                               | Chief                  Financial Officer |

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America,

Plaintiff

 

v. Case No. 08-cr-103-01-SM

Luis Escribano-Cora,

 Defendants

O R D E R

Defendant Cora’s motion to continue the trial is granted (document no.

10). Trial has been rescheduled for the month of November 2009. Defendant

Cora shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later than September 18, 2009. 

On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be effective. 

 The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial,

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Case 1:08-cr-00103-SM Document 13 Filed 09/07/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Final Pretrial Conference is scheduled for October 19, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. 

Jury selection will take place on November 3, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________

 Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

September 7, 2009

cc: Stanley Norkunas, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:08-cr-00103-SM Document 13 Filed 09/07/09 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 08-cr-89-01-PB

Erasmo R. Ruiz

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for March 3, 2009, citing a signed plea agreement

and the need for additional time to schedule a change of plea

hearing at the convenience of the court and the parties. The

government does not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reasons and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from March 3, 2009 to May 5, 2009. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:08-cr-00089-PB Document 49 Filed 02/19/09 Page 1 of 2
2

The February 18, 2009 final pretrial conference is

cancelled. 

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

February 19, 2009

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Debra Walsh, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:08-cr-00089-PB Document 49 Filed 02/19/09 Page 2 of 2
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1691

To amend the Service Contract Act of 1965 to provide for the responsibility

in certain cases of a parent corporation of a Federal contractor to

provide health care benefits to retired employees of the contractor if

the contractor fails to provide such benefits.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 2, 2001

Mr. WELDON of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL

To amend the Service Contract Act of 1965 to provide for

the responsibility in certain cases of a parent corporation

of a Federal contractor to provide health care benefits

to retired employees of the contractor if the contractor

fails to provide such benefits.

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 ‘‘Service Contract

5 Health Security Act’’.
2

•HR 1691 IH

1 SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF PARENT CORPORATION TO

2 PROVIDE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE TO RE3 TIREES OF SUBSIDIARY CORPORATION.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(a) of the Service Con5 tract Act of 1965 (Public Law 89–286; 41 U.S.C. 351(a))

6 is amended by adding at the end the following new para7 graph:

8 ‘‘(6) A provision specifying that if the contract

9 is terminated, if the contract or a collective bar10 gaining agreement required that the contractor pro11 vide health care to contractor employees who per12 formed work to carry out the contract and who re13 tired before the contract was terminated, a parent

14 corporation of the contractor shall be responsible for

15 the provision of such health care coverage to such

16 retired employees if the contractor fails to provide

17 such coverage.’’.

18 (b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendment made by sub19 section (a) shall apply with respect to contracts for which

20 bids are solicited after the date of the enactment of this

21 Act.

Æ
#### In the Matter of Derrick Faulkner, Petitioner, v New York State Division of Parole, Respondent.

[809 NYS2d 597]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Board of Parole revoking petitioner’s parole.

In April 2002, petitioner was released to parole supervision, a condition of which was that he not violate the law or behave in a manner that threatens the safety or well-being of himself or others. In February 2004, petitioner was charged with violating this condition after he was caught leaving a Home Depot store with merchandise he had not paid for. Following a final revoca*1048tion hearing, he was found guilty of the charges, his parole was revoked and he was placed on a 12-month hold. The determination was upheld on administrative appeal, resulting in this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

Initially, we note that our review of the determination at issue “is limited to an examination of the record to ascertain whether there exists substantial evidence to support it” *(Matter of Bratton v New York State Bd. of Parole,*23 AD3d 879, 879 [2005]; *see Matter of Brew v New York State Div. of Parole,*22 AD3d 930, 930 [2005]). The loss prevention specialist of the Home Depot store testified at the final revocation hearing that he witnessed petitioner conceal items in a box on his cart and check out without paying for them. He stated that he confronted petitioner after petitioner passed the guards and was exiting the store. In our view, this testimony amply supports the administrative determination. Petitioner’s testimony that he was away from his cart during checkout and thought the cashier had charged him for the items presented a credibility issue for the Board of Parole to resolve *(see Matter of Williams v New York State Div. of Parole,*23 AD3d 800, 800-801 [2005]). We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find them to be unavailing.

Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 202 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 202

  To amend the Crime Control Act of 1990 to prohibit law enforcement 
  agencies from imposing a waiting period before accepting reports of 
              missing children less than 21 years of age.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2001

 Mr. Sweeney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Crime Control Act of 1990 to prohibit law enforcement 
  agencies from imposing a waiting period before accepting reports of 
              missing children less than 21 years of age.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as ``Suzanne's Law''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT.

    Section 3701(a) of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
5779(a)) is amended by striking ``age of 18'' and inserting ``age of 
21''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 08-cr-108-01-SM

Denise Lee

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 13) is

granted. Trial has been rescheduled for the May 2009 trial period. Defendant shall

file a Waiver of Speedy Trial Rights not later than February 23, 2009. On the filing

of such waiver, his continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances.

Case 1:08-cr-00108-SM Document 14 Filed 02/09/09 Page 1 of 2
2

This is a second continuance request grounded upon very general reasons. 

Additional continuances will not likely be granted absent extraordinary

circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: May 12, 2009 at 4:15 PM 

Jury Selection: May 19, 2009 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

February 9, 2009 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Counsel of Record

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:08-cr-00108-SM Document 14 Filed 02/09/09 Page 2 of 2