alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent, v Fidel R. Calderon, Appellant.

[789 NYS2d 273]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.), dated June 23, 2003, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

We reject the petitioner’s contention that it was not required to commence this proceeding to stay arbitration of the appellant’s uninsured motorist claim within the 20-day limitation period set forth in CPLR 7503 (c). “[T]he issue of whether or not the [appellant’s] injuries occurred as the result of an intentional act relates to whether certain conditions of coverage have been satisfied and not whether the parties have agreed to arbitrate” *(Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Rosado,*271 AD2d 527, 528 [2000]). To the extent that *Matter of United Community Ins. Co. v Gabriel*(229 AD2d 444 [1996]), holds otherwise, it should not be followed.

Allstate’s failure to seek a stay within 20 days of service of the demand for arbitration also precluded it from asserting in court that the uninsured motorist claim is barred by the statute *699of limitations *(see*CPLR 7503 [c]). Accordingly, the petition for a stay of arbitration should have been denied as time-barred and the proceeding should have been dismissed. Krausman, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Fisher, JJ., concur.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. DALE BOONE.

September 5, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
#### Henry Burrick *v.*Richard Burns.

Exceptions — Appeal and Error.

Where the record does not show exceptions to the giving or refusing of instructions below, the Appellate Court cannot revise it.

Witness — Absence—Continuance—Drunkenness.

It is the duty of a defendant, knowing of the absence of a material witness, to move for a continuance; alleged drunkenness is no legal excuse for a defendant’s absence and culpable neglect of his own ease.

APPEAL EROM NICHOLAS CIRCUIT COURT.

January 31, 1868.

*Norvell & Boss, for appellant.*

*Stanton & Throop, for appellee.*

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson :

The record shows no exception to the giving or refusing of instructions by the court; and therefore, even if there had been any error in that respect, thi§ court could not revise it. The affidavit of the appellant did not entitle him to a new trial. The testimony of his absent witnesses could have had but little, if any, effect on the amount of damages, and the appellant ought to have known that the witness was absent, and have moved for a continuance; his alleged drunkenness is no legal excuse for his own • absence and culpable neglect of his case.

Nor does the amount of the assessed damages entitle the appellant to a new trial.

This court cannot say that for such a battery resulting in such a disability, $500 should be deemed so exorbitant as to indicate passion or prejudice.

Wherefore, the judgment is, affirmed with damages.
#### TOWNSHIP OF MAHWAH v. BERGEN COUNTY BOARD OF TAXATION AND BOROUGH OF CLOSTER.

May 16, 1984.

Petition for certification granted.
, 

COMED MEDICAL SYSTEMS, CO., LTD. d/b/a GEMSS MEDICAL and 

GEMSS NORTH AMERICA INC., f/k/a GEMSS USA INC., 

Appellants, 

v. 

AADCO IMAGING, LLC and AADCO MEDICAL, INC. 

Appellees. 

On Appeal from Cause No. 14-0486-C26 

In the 26thDistrict Court of Williamson County, Texas 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES' 

AADCO IMAGING, LLC AND AADCO MEDICAL, INC. 

Kenneth J. Ferguson David N. Cole 

Texas Bar No. 6918100 New Hampshire Bar No. 429 

Email: KFerguson@gordonrees.com Vermont Bar No. 1986 

Bradley B. Bush Email: dcole@colelaw.com 

Texas Bar. No. 24057787 Law Office of David N. Cole 

Email: bbush@gordonrees.com 35 South Main Street 

Gordon & Rees, LLP Hanover, NH 03755-2047 

816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1510 Telephone: .603.643.4500 

Austin, TX 78701 Facsimile: 603.643.5297 

Telephone: 512.391.0197 

Facsimile: 512.391.0183 

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 1 
enter their appearance for Appellees AADCO Imaging, LLC and AADCO 

Medical, Inc. Mr. Ferguson is a member in good standing of the State Bar of 

Texas. Mr. Bush is a member in good standing of the State Bar of Texas. 

Respectfully submitted, 

GORDON & REES, L.L.P. 

By: Is! Kenneth I Ferguson 

Kenneth J. Ferguson 

State Bar No. 6918100 

Email: KFerguson@gordonrees.com 

Bradley B. Bush 

State Bar. No. 24057787 

Email: bbush@gordonrees.com 

816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1510 

Austin, TX 78701 

Telephone: 512.391.0197 

Facsimile: 512.391.0183 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS AADCO IMAGING, LLC and AADCO MEDICAL, INC. 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE •-) 
se

t v

a e

a

to t

e 

o

ow

g cou

se

: 

Simon W. Hendershot, III 

Christy L. Martin 

1800 Bering Drive, Suite 600 

Houston, Texas 77057 

trey@k-hpc.com 

cmartin@k-hpc.com 

David N. Cole, Esq. 

35 South Main Street 

Hanover, New Hampshire 03755-2047 

dcole@colelaw.com 

Is! Kenneth J. Ferguson 

Kenneth J. Ferguson 

/21816447v. 1 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 3
#### Wm. Lucas *v.*Oscar Boyce and Wife.

Pleading — Sufficiency of Petition — Suit on Written Instrument.

It is essential to entitle a plaintiff to relief that he should set forth in his petition, if he sues on a writing, the covenants, of the defendants, and the breach for which he seek3 redress, and the writing or a copy should be filed and made part of the petition.

APPEAL EROM SCOTT CIRCUIT COURT.

*Polk*& *Gantrill, for appellant.*

*Shepard, for appellee.*

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Peters:

A judgment having been rendered in the Court below against appellant by default, he has appealed to this Court, and the only question is whether the facts stated in the petition, are sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The action was brought in equity against the personal representative, and heirs of one McDowell deceased, who was the guardian of appellee Mrs. Boyce, and against appellant as the surety to recover the amount of estate of the ward received by the guardian in his life time.

The covenant which was, or should have been the foundation of the action is not referred to in the petition, nor is a copy made a part thereof. It is neither set forth in terms, nor in substance, and it is not even alleged that the guardian, and his surety covenanted to pay over the estate which might come to the hands to the former either to the ward, or to any one for her.

It is essential to entitle a plaintiff to relief that he should set forth in his petition if he sues upon a writing, the covenants, or undertakings therein, of the defendants, and the breaches .for which he seeks redress, and the writing, or an official copy if it is an official paper should be filed and made a part of the petition. This is required by the Civil Code.

It is apparent therefore from the foregoing statement that the petition does not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Wherefore the judgment is *reversed,*and the cause remanded with directions to permit appellees to amend their petition if they should within reasonable time, offer to do so, and further proceedings consistent herewith.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Ellen Bausback","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/ebausbac\/","title":"First Look: Spaceplane Stacked and Shaken at NASA Test Facility","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"81WC1hTQmL\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/glenn\/first-look-spaceplane-stacked-and-shaken-at-nasa-test-facility\/\">First Look: Spaceplane Stacked and Shaken at NASA Test Facility<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/glenn\/first-look-spaceplane-stacked-and-shaken-at-nasa-test-facility\/embed\/#?secret=81WC1hTQmL\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“First Look: Spaceplane Stacked and Shaken at NASA Test Facility” — NASA\" data-secret=\"81WC1hTQmL\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/20240131-207a0543.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Balance
Sheet, Statement of Operations, Statements of Cash Flows and Notes thereto
incorporated in Part I, Item 1. of this Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its
entirty by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1,332
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,832
<PP&E>                                         222,265
<DEPRECIATION>                               (119,731)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  36,367
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          309,672
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       285,093
<OTHER-SE>                                   (558,398)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    36,367
<SALES>                                          9,328
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,328
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  243,664
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (234,336)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (234,336)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (234,336)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2398

To designate the Federal building located at 324 Twenty-Fifth Street in 

Ogden, Utah, as the James V. Hansen Federal Building. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 10, 2004

Mr. HATCH (for himself and Mr. BENNETT) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

A BILL

To designate the Federal building located at 324 TwentyFifth Street in Ogden, Utah, as the James V. Hansen 

Federal Building.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The Federal building located at 324 Twenty-Fifth 

5 Street in Ogden, Utah, shall be known and designated as 

6 the ‘‘James V. Hansen Federal Building’’. 

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

8 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 
2

•S 2398 IS 

1 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

2 a reference to the ‘‘James V. Hansen Federal Building’’.

Æ
#### H. S. McFatridge *v.*Herod Gore.

Evidence — Claim for Usurious Interest Established by Assignor Before Release from Original Debt.

An assignee of a claim for usurious interest, who was also surety for the assignor upon the original debt out of which the claim for usury originated, cannot establish the fact of the usury 'by the evidence of his assignor only, until he shah have released the assignor from respsonsibility on che original liability for money paid as his surety to the original creditor.

APPEAL EROM MERCER CIRCUIT COURT.

May 29, 1868.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Williams:

Gore having paid, as security of Morgan, the judgment debt in McFabridge’s favor and Morgan insisting that there was a large amount of usurious interest included transferred to Gore his claim therefor.

Gore sued McFatridge and without releasing Morgan and over the objections of McFatridge established his claim by Morgan’s evidence.

Although this was but an equitable assignment and perhaps the assignor could not be held responsible to the assignee on the assignment yet there is nothing to show that Gore had released Morgan from his original liability for money paid to his use on account of the suretyship, therefore, every dollar which Gore could recover of and collect from McFatridge would go to reduce Morgan’s liability to him, hence Morgan was as much interested in the recovery as if he had sued in his own name. Before Morgan can be competent he must be released from responsibility to Gore on *206the original liability for money paid to his use to McFatridge.

*Hooe, for appellant.*

*Polk, for appellee.*

For this error the judgment is reversed with directions for a new trial and further proceedings consistent herewith.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, John C. Garrison, certify that:

 

1. Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of ICOP Digital, Inc.;

 

2. Basedon 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 statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I am responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

 

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

 

c. Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors: 

 

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 
|                    |                                         |
|-------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                    | /s/  JOHN C. GARRISON                        |
|                    | John  C. Garrison                            |
|                    | *Principal Financial and Accounting Officer* |
|                    |                                         |
| Date: June 9, 2005 |                                         |

 

----
**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 Annual Report of AetherSystems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31,2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), each of the undersigned, to the best of his knowledge and inthe capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

 

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

 

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ David S.  Oros       |   | May 2, 2005 |
|--------------------------|--------|-------------|
| David S. Oros            |   |
| Chief Executive  Officer |   |
|                     |   |
|                     |   |
| /s/ David C.  Reymann    |   | May 2, 2005 |
| David C. Reymann         |   |
| Chief Financial  Officer |   |
|                          |        |             |  |

 

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to AetherSystems, Inc. and will be retained by Aether Systems, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
1 min read

# International Medical Support/Evacuation

### Meredith Hawkins

Mar 21, 2023

Article

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

NASA’s missions require employees traveling all over the globe.  Foreign travel may be required to support a launch, present at an international conference, train in a remote location, or partner with a country to advance their exploration and space efforts.  Therefore, the Agency contracts with a company that provides as-needed medical support to employees should they experience a serious health event while abroad.  This support includes all levels of medical evacuation, especially if the employee’s location is remote or in a country that is medically underserved.  This approach ensures the health and safety of Agency employees, even when they are working in a foreign location.  

NASA Civil Servant Travelers on Official NASA Business Medical Support While Abroad (PDF)

Health and Medical Systems

## Share

                  -   
                  -   
                  -   
                  -   

## Details

Johnson Space Center

## Related Terms

                - Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO)

## Explore More

1 min readInternational Medical Support/EvacuationArticle										1 year ago									

1 min readMission HealthArticle										1 year ago									

1 min readAerospace MedicineArticle										1 year ago									

## Discover Related Topics

Missions

Humans in Space

Climate Change

Solar System
#### John M. Graham, Etc., *v.*A. A. Gordon, Etc.

■Officers — Constable —Jurisdiction — Collection.

The *prima facie*presumption is that a constable would not undertake to collect claims from persons who were not within his jurisdiction.

Destruction of Records — Oral Testimony.

Oral testimony is competent to prove the execution of a constable’s bond and his qualifications where the archives of the county clerk’s office have been destroyed.

APPEAL EROM MARION CIRCUIT COURT.

January 4, 1867.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson :

The objections urged against the petition are all unavailing. The *prima facie*presumption is that the constable would not have undertaken to collect claims on persons beyond his official power, •and that, therefore, all the persons whom he promised to collect from were within his jurisdiction. An express averment to that ■effect was not, therefore, necessary, and if, in any instance,, a debtor did not reside in Marion the fact was pleadable, and a ■failure to suggest it implies that the legal presumption was true. And the appellant’s counsel is not warranted in assuming that the petition fails to allege collection by the constables. It not only shows statutory liability by the fact that 120 days had elapsed from the date of the undertaking to collect, but it explicitly " *charges11*the collection of all the claims. And the constable’s failure to answer admits all those allegations.

Noble’s testimony was competent. The destruction of all the ■archives in the County Court clerk’s office legalized his oral testimony of the execution of the constable’s bond, and that also of the sureties, and of the constable’s qualification, and he sufficiently *92proved the demand of payment, and also the amount put into the-constable’s hands for collection, and which sustains the verdict and judgment.

*Roundtree &*Fogle, *for appellants.*

*Noth, for appellees.*

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.
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



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his/her capacity as an Officer of Variflex, Inc. (the Company), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:



the Annual
Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|Dated: October 23, 2003      
|-----------------------------
|                             
|By: /s/    Raymond H. Losi II
|                             
|Chief Executive Officer      



|Dated: October 23, 2003  
|-------------------------
|                         
|By: /s/    Petar Katurich
|                         
|Chief Financial Officer