alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Tamara M. Pickard, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[745 NYS2d 244]

Rose, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 23, 2001, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The record discloses that soon after the beginning of her work day, claimant went home without permission because she was upset by what she considered to be her employer’s unduly harsh criticism of her during a heated exchange over a work-related matter. She then telephoned the employer from her home to advise that she would not return to work that day. When the employer demanded to know her access code to the office telephone system so that customers’ voice mail messages could be retrieved in her absence, claimant equated this request with a demand for her resignation. Although the employer did not agree with her interpretation of the request, claimant resigned anyway, offering to work an additional two weeks to allow the employer time to find a replacement. The employer declined the offer of two weeks’ notice and accepted claimant’s resignation, effective immediately.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant left her employment under disqualifying circumstances. Criticism by a supervisor has been held not to constitute good cause for resigning, even in cases where the criticism is considered by the claimant to be unfair or unduly harsh *(see, Matter of Alascia [Kuhr*—Commissioner *of Labor],*281 AD2d 739; *Matter of Loria [Commissioner of Labor],*254 AD2d 676, 677). Any disparity between the parties’ representations presented an is*697sue of credibility for resolution by the Board *(see, Matter of Toth [Sweeney],*244 AD2d 752, 753). The remaining contentions raised herein have been examined and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
CINCINNATI MILACRON INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
COMPUTATION OF PER-SHARE EARNINGS


(In thousands, except per-share amounts)


                                   1996       1995       1994
                                 --------   --------   --------

Net earnings                     $ 66,301   $105,644   $ 37,711

Less preferred dividends              240        240        240
                                 --------   --------   --------
 Net earnings available
   to common shareholders        $ 66,061   $105,404   $ 37,471
                                 ========   ========   ========

Primary

 Average number of shares
   outstanding                     37,465     34,009     33,641
 Add dilutive effect of stock
   options based on treasury
   stock method                       630        614        421
                                 --------   --------   --------

     Total                         38,095     34,623     34,062
                                 ========   ========   ========

      Per share amount           $   1.73   $   3.04   $   1.10
                                 ========   ========   ========

Fully diluted

 Average number of shares
   outstanding                     37,465     34,009     33,641
 Add dilutive effect of stock
   options based on treasury
   stock method                       664        644        470
                                 --------   --------   --------

     Total                         38,129     34,653     34,111
                                 ========   ========   ========

      Per share amount           $   1.73   $   3.04   $   1.10
                                 ========   ========   ========
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Mark J. DeSimone, et al.

v. Civil No. 08-cv-57-JL

Mary Ellen Corbett, et al.

O R D E R

On June 30, 2008, the Court granted a stay as to all proceedings in this case, except for

discovery from fact witnesses, Mr. Corbett, plaintiff’s experts, and defendants’ economic experts.

The stay is in effect until the criminal case against Mary Ellen Corbett is resolved.

Also on June 30, 2008, the Court issued an order that the Motion to Dismiss, Document #9,

filed by Mary Ellen Corbett, will be taken under advisement. The Court herewith orders that the

Motion to Dismiss is denied without prejudice with the option to reinstate it once the stay is lifted.

If defendant Corbett chooses to proceed with the motion once the case is no longer stayed, she may

file a notice reinstating the motion; subsequently, the related documents, Document #12, Objection

and Document #16, Reply to Objection to Motion shall be reinstated by the Court. 

Defense counsel is ordered to file status reports with the Court on or before January 1, 2009

and every 90 days thereafter until the stay is lifted.

SO ORDERED.

December 10 , 2008 _________________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

cc: Laurie Lacoste, Esq.

Robert Shaines, Esq.

Paul Kleinman, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00057-JL Document 29 Filed 12/10/08 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of CDSI Holdings Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J.
Bryant Kirkland III, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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.



April 30, 2004                        /s/ J. Bryant Kirkland III
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      J. Bryant Kirkland III
                                      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### The Union Trust Co. of Dayton, Ohio, et al. *v.*Simpson.

(No. 24318

— Decided April 11, 1934.)

*Mr. John W. Bricker,*attorney general, *Mr. Sidney G. Kusworm, Mr. D. W. Iddings, Mr. Hubert A. Estabrook*and *Mr. Norman L. Weisman,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Messrs. Odas & Odas*and *Mr. W. S. Bhotehamel,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court; that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same hereby is, reversed and said cause is hereby remanded to the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery county, Ohio, with instructions to sustain the demurrer to the petition, for the reason that statutes in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed, and under a-strict construction of Section 712, General Code, presentation of a check for certification is not a presentation for “collection and payment”. *Fulton, Supt. of Banks,*v. *B. R. Baker-Toledo Co., post,*226.

*Judgment reversed and ca/use remanded.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Bevis and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
##### Figure 2: World Map of U.S. Residents' Holdings of Total Foreign Long-term Securities, December 2023

Country Total Foreign Long-Term SecuritiesAnguilla No DataArgentina (10,50]Aruba [0,10]Australia (100,500]Austria (10,50]Bahamas [0,10]Barbados [0,10]Belgium (50,100]Bermuda (100,500]Brazil (100,500]British Virgin Islands (50,100]Bulgaria [0,10]Canada (1000,2000]Cayman Islands (2000,3000]Chile (10,50]China (100,500]Colombia (10,50]Costa Rica [0,10]Cuba [0,10]Curacao (50,100]Cyprus [0,10]Czech Republic [0,10]Denmark (100,500]Ecuador [0,10]Egypt [0,10]Finland (50,100]France (500,1000]Germany (100,500]Greece (10,50]Guatemala [0,10]Guernsey (50,100]Hong Kong (100,500]Hungary (10,50]India (100,500]Indonesia (50,100]Ireland (500,1000]Israel (50,100]Italy (100,500]Jamaica [0,10]Japan (1000,2000]Jersey (100,500]Kazakhstan [0,10]Kuwait [0,10]Lebanon [0,10]Liberia (10,50]Luxembourg (100,500]Malaysia (10,50]Mauritius (10,50]Mexico (100,500]Monaco [0,10]Morocco [0,10]Netherlands (500,1000]New Zealand (10,50]Norway (50,100]Pakistan [0,10]Panama (10,50]Peru (10,50]Philippines (10,50]Poland (10,50]Portugal (10,50]Romania [0,10]Russia (10,50]Saint Kitts and Nevis No DataSaudi Arabia No DataSerbia [0,10]Singapore (100,500]South Africa (50,100]South Korea (100,500]Spain (100,500]Sweden (100,500]Switzerland (500,1000]Syrian Arab Republic No DataTaiwan (100,500]Thailand (10,50]Trinidad and Tobago [0,10]Turkey (10,50]Ukraine [0,10]United Arab Emirates (10,50]United Kingdom (1000,2000]Uruguay [0,10]Venezuela [0,10]
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 914 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 15, 2008.
    Resolved, That the Clerk of the House inform the Senate that a quorum of the 
House is present and that the House is ready to proceed with business.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02325-CBS

JEFFR[E]Y B. SAFFER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLUB HOLDINGS, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company,

Defendant.

 

ORDER 

 

Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer

This civil action comes before the court on Plaintiff’s “Unopposed Motion for Leave

to File Amended Complaint” (filed March 5, 2012) (Doc. # 27). On December 13, 2011,

this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer to handle all dispositive

matters including trial and entry of a final judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c)

and D.C. COLO. LCivR 72.2. (See Doc. # 15). The court has reviewed the Motion, the

tendered “First Amended Complaint” (Doc. # 27-1), the entire case file, and the applicable

law and is sufficiently advised in the premises. Plaintiff represents that Defendant does

not oppose the Motion. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amended

Complaint” (filed March 5, 2012) (Doc. # 27) is GRANTED. The tendered “First Amended

Complaint” (Doc. # 27-1) is accepted for filing as of the date of this Order. 

DATED at Denver, Colorado this 7th day of March, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Craig B. Shaffer 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 1:11-cv-02325-CBS Document 28 Filed 03/07/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
Case 1:11-cr-00372-WJM Document 39 Filed 09/22/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5
Case 1:11-cr-00372-WJM Document 39 Filed 09/22/14 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5
Case 1:11-cr-00372-WJM Document 39 Filed 09/22/14 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5
Case 1:11-cr-00372-WJM Document 39 Filed 09/22/14 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5
Case 1:11-cr-00372-WJM Document 39 Filed 09/22/14 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 5
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of iGATE Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sujit Sircar, Chief Financial Officer 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 my knowledge:

(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.



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/S/    SUJIT
SIRCAR                 
|Sujit Sircar Chief Financial Officer

Date: October 29, 2009
**Exhibit 99.31**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

| I, George A. Cope, certify that:  |
|----------------------------------------|
| 1.                                     | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of BCE Inc.;  |
| 2.                                     | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a 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 report;  |
| 3.                                     | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  |
| 4.                                     | The issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer and have:  |
|                                   | (a) | Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  |
|                                   | (b) | Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  |
|                                   | (c) | Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  |
|                                   | (d) | Disclosed in this report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and  |

 

----
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 4Federal Reserve Bank of: ClevelandFilings received during the week ending August 22, 2020FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodNONE
#### FLAKE v. LE BLANC.

No. 14030.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

May 16, 1932.

John C. O’Connor, of New Orleans, for appellant.

Lemle, Moreno & Lemle and C. Ellis Heni-can, all of New Orleans, for appellee.

JANVIER, J.

This suit results from an automobile collision at a street corner at which there is a traffic signal light which operates automatically.

Flake was driving his Pontiac sedan down St. Claude avenue, and Le Blanc, at the steering wheel of his Ford coupé, was crossing St. Claude avenue at Frenchman street, and going towards the river.

It is charged by Flake, and two other eyewitnesses corroborate his version of the encounter, that, as his car reached Frenchman street, the semaphore light facing him turned to green which, under section 14 of the Traffic Ordinance (No. 7490, C. C. S.), indicated that vehicles intending to cross St. Claude avenue should come to a stop and permit those on the said avenue to proceed; that, while he was in the intersection and when he had almost completed the crossing, his Pontiac was struck on the left side, near the rear, by Le Blanc’s Ford which was crossing in complete disregard of the fact that the right of way, in accordance with the ordinance, belonged to plaintiff; that said Pontiac was turned over and damaged. Plaintiff claims $153.25 as the amount expended in removing his car and repairing the damage caused to it.

Le Blanc, on the other hand, charges that he had entered the intersection while the light facing him was green, and that before he could complete the passage Flake’s ear dashed in front of his Ford when it was too late for him to stop.

The judgment in the court below was in plaintiff’s favor for the amount prayed for, and defendant has appealed.

Le Blanc, defendant, in support of his contention, produced three eyewitnesses, all of whom corroborated his version.

Nilmerically defendant’s witnesses predominate, and it would be very difficult for us to reach a conclusion in the matter were it not for the fact that the judgment below was rendered in plaintiff’s favor and for the further fact that defendant, Le Blanc, is plainly the victim of seriously defective vision.

At the trial below, counsel for plaintiff subjected defendant to various tests in an effort to prove that his eyesight was not normal, and it was conclusively .shown that, across a room only thirty-five feet wide, he could not distinguish the color of a red cross poster and, at a distance of only a few feet, he could not tell the color of a blue book.

This fact and the presumption of correctness which attaches to the finding of the trial judge leave us convinced that the judgment should not be reversed.

The amount awarded seems to be correct, and it is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment appealed from be, and it is, affirmed; appellant to pay the cost of appeal.

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 15 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AWARENESS LETTER FROM DELOITTE & TOUCHE, LLP DATED SEPTEMBER 3, 2003 CONCERNINGUNAUDITED INTERIM FINANCIAL INFORMATION**

 

September 3, 2003 

 

Factory Card &Party Outlet Corp. 

2727 Diehl Road 

Naperville, Illinois 60563 

 

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial informationof Factory Card & Party Outlet Corp. and subsidiary for the three-month and six-month periods ended August 2, 2003 (Successor Company operations), the three-month and four-month periods ended August 3, 2002 (Successor Company operations), andthe two-month period ended April 6, 2002 (Predecessor Company operations), as indicated in our report dated September 3, 2003; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information. 

 

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended August 2, 2003, is incorporated by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-92248, 333-98549, and 333-108222 on Form S-8. 

 

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statementprepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. 

 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Chicago, Illinois
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                     National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; T Cell Co-Stimulation Pathways-PO1.                

*Date:*                     October 29, 2008.                

*Time:*                     11 a.m. to 2 p.m.                

*Agenda:*                     To review and evaluate grant applications.                

*Place:*                     National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Conference Call).                

*Contact Person:*                     Rebecca L.  Jorgenson, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, DEA/NIAID/NIH/DHHS, Room 2217, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC-7616, Bethesda, MD 20892-7616, 301-496-2550,                     *jorgensonr@niaid.nih.gov*.                

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 26, 2008.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E8-23451 Filed 10-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M