alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Guardianship of Dale Gladwin, a Person Alleged to be Incapacitated. Kathleen A. Payne, Respondent; Richard J. Gladwin, Appellant.

[828 NYS2d 737]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (Anthony F. Shaheen, J.), entered March 9, 2005 in a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81. The order, among other things, appointed petitioner as guardian of the person and property of Dale Gladwin.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum; Respondent appeals from an order appointing petitioner as guardian of their brother Dale pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81. Dale, born November 22, 1968, is the youngest of 12 children. He has Down syndrome, and it is undisputed that he is an incapacitated person. For approximately three years, respondent resided with Dale and their elderly parents in order to care for Dale and for the parents, who were ill. The mother died in June 2003, and the father filed a petition pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81 in July 2004 seek*1237ing the appointment of respondent as guardian of the person and property of Dale. By a report dated September 13, 2004, the Court Evaluator recommended respondent’s appointment as Dale’s guardian but noted that several of Dale’s siblings had contacted him to express their concerns about Dale’s isolation from them. Petitioner thereafter filed a cross petition seeking to be appointed as Dale’s guardian. The parties’ father died prior to the hearing, thus in effect rendering the cross petition a petition.

In granting the petition, Supreme Court noted that, in their respective wills signed in 1999, the parents named respondent as Dale’s guardian and petitioner as the alternate guardian. The court determined therefrom that the parents considered both parties to be acceptable guardians for Dale. The court further determined that, although the physical needs of Dale were adequately met by respondent, his “emotional and developmental needs have been severely restricted by his living environment which the court finds to be extremely detrimental to his well-being and quality of life.” The court thus concluded that it is in Dale’s best interests to live with petitioner and her family in South Carolina, where Dale would have “a more socially active and enriching life through organizations and groups which are specifically set up to meet his needs,” as well as unlimited access to his siblings. Contrary to respondent’s contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in appointing petitioner as Dale’s guardian *(see generally Matter of Von Bulow,*63 NY2d 221, 224 [1984]; *Matter of Wynn,*11 AD3d 1014, 1015-1016 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 703 [2005]).

Finally, we conclude that the court’s failure to appoint counsel for Dale does not constitute reversible error, inasmuch as Dale was present at the court proceedings and the court thus had the opportunity to observe him *(cf. Matter of Edward G.N.,*17 AD3d 600, 601 [2005]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Martoche and Smith, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Omar D. Williams, Appellant.

[869 NYS2d 909]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated November 1, 1993 *(People v Williams,*198 AD2d 249 [1993]), affirming a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered June 11, 1991.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel (see *Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Prudenti, PJ., Mastro, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 99.1



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

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





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Diatect International Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jay W. Downs, Principal Executive Officerand Principal 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 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 result of operations of the Company.





Dated:  November 14, 2003

By:

/s/ Jay W. Downs________

Name:

Jay W. Downs,

Title:

Principal Executive Officer,

Principal Financial Officer
#### Michael Madison, Respondent, v Andrew A. Sama, M.D., et al., Appellants.

[963 NYS2d 242]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered September 26, 2012, which denied defendants’ preclusion motion, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*582In this medical malpractice action, plaintiff previously moved for leave to further depose defendant doctor on a previously unspecified theory of liability, excessive blood loss during two surgeries. The motion court granted the relief requested and, in an interim decision, directed plaintiff to serve an amended bill of particulars to spell out more clearly the new theory of liability. On appeal, we reversed the motion court’s grant of the motion for further depositions, finding that plaintiff did not “establish that ‘unusual or unanticipated circumstances’ had developed requiring further discovery ‘to prevent substantial prejudice’ ” *(Madison v Sama,*92 AD3d 607, 607 [1st Dept 2012]). In identifying the order on appeal, our prior order mentioned the interim direction that plaintiff serve an amended bill of particulars. However, our decision did not discuss, let alone determine, the propriety of the motion court’s sua sponte directive to plaintiff’s counsel to file an amended bill of particulars. The only question presented on the prior appeal, as crafted by defendants, limited itself to the issue of the supplemental examination before trial of the defendant Sama. Accordingly, the law of the case doctrine did not mandate that plaintiff be precluded from presenting evidence on the new theories and injuries alleged in the amended bill of particulars *(see Jumax Assoc. v 350 Cabrini Owners Corp.,*71 AD3d 584 [1st Dept 2010]; *Transport Workers Union of Am. Local 100 AFL-CIO v Schwartz,*32 AD3d 710, 715 [1st Dept 2006], *lv dismissed*7 NY3d 922 [2006]).

The motion court did not improvidently exercise its authority by deferring to the trial court for a determination as to the preclusion and limitation of expert testimony, limiting plaintiffs two neurologists’ testimony to their anticipated roles—fact witness and expert witness—and directing the parties to expeditiously notify each other of their intentions with regard to expert testimony at trial.

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Tom, J.E, Sweeny, Saxe, Román and Feinman, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 35.2**

 

 

**WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATEANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

            I, Barbara Campbell, an authorized officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. (the “Administrative Agent”), dohereby certify to WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (the “Depositor”) and Washington Mutual Bank (the “Servicer”), pursuant to the Amended and Restated Administrative Agent Agreement dated as of February 1, 2005 (the“Servicing Agreement”) by and between the Servicer, and theAdministrative Agent the following with respect to WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates WAMU Series 2007-OA2 Trust for the 2007 fiscal year  (the “RelevantYear”): 

1.                  A review of the activities of the AdministrativeAgent during the Relevant Year and of performance under the Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

2.                  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review,the Administrative Agent has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Relevant Year.

 

Dated as of March 1, 2008.

 
| /s/ Barbara Campbell Name:  Barbara Campbell Title:    First Vice President |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                  Certification

I, R.V. Bailey, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Aspen Exploration
Corporation;

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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers 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) 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 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 report is being prepared;

     b) [intentionally omitted]

     c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'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 changes in the company'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 company's internal control over financial reporting.

5. The registrant's other certifying officers 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's board 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 and report financial information; 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 over
financial reporting.

Dated: February 11, 2008            By  /s/ R.V. Bailey
                                        ---------------
                                        R.V. Bailey, interim Chief Executive
                                        Officer and Principal Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 12.2

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Andre Bergstein,certify that:

 

1.	   I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 20-F of Gafisa S.A.;

 

2.	   Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.	   Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.	   The company’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have:

 

a)	   Designedsuch 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 company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)	   Designedsuch internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financialstatements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

 

c)  	 Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and

 

d)	   Disclosedin this report any change in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period coveredby the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

 

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

 

a)	   Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and

 

b)  	 Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the company’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: April 27, 2016
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jermar McDaniel, Appellant.

Submitted April 6, 2009;

decided April 30, 2009

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Steven Banks, Esq., the Legal Aid Society, 199 Water Street, New York, NY 10038 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Efrain RIOS, a.k.a. Efrain Cardenas Rios, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-50571.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.*

Filed Oct. 23, 2006.

Becky S. Walker, Esq., David P. Kowal, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jerry Kaplan, Esq., Kaplan, Kenegos *&*Kadin, Beverly Hills, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Efrain Rios appeals from the 121-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rios contends that the district court erred in determining that he did not qualify for a reduction in his offense level for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. However, the district court’s finding that Rios did not accept responsibility for all of the conduct for which he was convicted was not clearly erroneous. *See United States v. Wilson,*392 F.3d 1055, 1062-63 (9th Cir.2005) (affirming the denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility where the defendant denied conduct for which he was convicted and offered trial testimony that the district court found not credible).

To the extent Rios contends his sentence was unreasonable under *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), this contention is waived. *See United States v. Romm,*455 F.3d 990, 997 (9th Cir.2006) (noting that arguments raised by a party for the first time in its reply brief are deemed waived).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Frederick J. Erickson, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bull Run
Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 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-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 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 May 31, 2004 (the Evaluation Date) and 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; andc)
    
    disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants first fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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 the registrants
board of directors:  a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal controls over financial reporting. Date:
    
    July 15, 2004Signed:
    
    /s/ FREDERICK J. ERICKSON

Frederick J. EricksonVice President  Finance and Chief Financial Officer
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
Team, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ted W. Owen, Senior Vice President  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:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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/    TED W.
OWEN                                           
|Ted W. Owen Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

January 8, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 1995 for Hallwood Energy Corporation and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000319019
<NAME> HALLWOOD ENERGY CORPORATION
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                             119
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      700
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,815
<PP&E>                                         116,621
<DEPRECIATION>                               (106,758)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  16,950
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,085
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           421
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          4
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,190
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    16,950
<SALES>                                          3,992
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,043
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,704
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 344
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (5)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (5)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (5)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.04)
        

</TABLE>