alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Lenea’jah F. and Another, Children Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Makeba T.S., Appellant; Abbott House, Respondent.

[963 NYS2d 105]

Order, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about April 13, 2012, which denied respondent’s motion to vacate orders of disposition entered on or about April 2, 2012, upon her default, terminating her parental rights to the subject children on the ground of permanent neglect, and committing the custody and guardianship of the children to the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York and petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from aforesaid orders of disposition, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from nonappealable papers.

Respondent failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her absence from the proceeding and a meritorious defense to the allegation of permanent neglect *(see Matter of Alexander John B. [Cynthia A.],*87 AD3d 927 [2011], *lv dismissed in part, denied in part*18 NY3d 917 [2012]). Her sole submission was an affirmation by her counsel, who did not have personal knowledge of the facts. Counsel stated that respondent did not have the money to pay for transportation to the hearing, but she did not *515explain respondent’s failure to notify either her attorney or the court that she was unable to appear (see *Matter of Isaac Howard M. [Fatima M.],*90 AD3d 559, 560 [1st Dept 2011], *lv dismissed in part, denied in part*18 NY3d 975 [2012]).

Counsel stated that respondent would have testified that she lacked medical insurance and financial resources to plan for the children (see Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]). This general, unsubstantiated statement is insufficient to establish a meritorious defense. Respondent failed to show that petitioner made no effort to help her with her drug addiction, or that she remained drug-free, cooperated with drug testing or regularly attended therapy *(see*Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [c]; *Matter of Destiny S. [Hilda S.],*79 AD3d 666 [1st Dept 2010], *lv denied*16 NY3d 709 [2011]).

Contrary to respondent’s contention, her attorney’s refusal to participate in the fact-finding hearing in her absence did not deprive her of effective representation; it preserved her opportunity to seek to open the default *(see Matter of Male J.,*214 AD2d 417, 417 [1st Dept 1995]).

Concur—Andrias, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
|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 accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Jan E. Dulman, the Chief Financial Officer of Global Gold Corporation (the "Registrant") hereby certify that:

1. The Registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 (the "Quarterly Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Date: September 29, 2008
     
     /s/ Jan E. DulmanJan E. DulmanChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)


---
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 *** The Honorable Lawrence L. Piersol, Senior District Judge for the U.S.

District Court for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JOHN EDWARD GIBBONS,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-10218

D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00113-JAT-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 11, 2013** 

San Francisco, California

Before: O’SCANNLAIN and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and PIERSOL, Senior

District Judge.*** 

FILED

JUN 19 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

John Edward Gibbons appeals his convictions following a bench trial of

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and possession with intent to distribute five kilograms

or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(ii). We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court erred by denying Gibbons’

motion to suppress. This same issue was raised by Gibbons’ co-defendant, Lisa

Sayamontry. See United States v. Sayamontry, No. 12-10153, ___ Fed. Appx. ___,

2013 WL 2632188 (9th Cir. June 13, 2013) (unpublished disposition). For the reasons

stated in Sayamontry, we hold that the district court correctly denied the motion to

suppress.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          61,789
<SECURITIES>                                   702,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,807
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               783,661
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,128,661
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         4,851
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    109,356
<OTHER-SE>                                     286,144
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,128,661
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,636
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                252,839
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            252,839
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                127,336
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   125,503
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
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
  1.
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.
 /s/ Erik OlssonErik OlssonPresident and
Chief Executive OfficerFebruary 16, 2010/s/ David MathiesonDavid MathiesonSenior Vice President, and
Chief Financial OfficerFebruary 16, 2010
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 uKarma Corporation (the “Company”) on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bill Glaser, Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Interim Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, certify to
the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 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 and 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.




Date:
      May 14, 2009
            
            /s/ Bill GlaserBill
      GlaserChief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive
              Officer)
      and Interim Chief Financial Officer
              (Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)




The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.
EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the amended Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Lucky Strike
Explorations Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
Michael Noble, as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss.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 Company.


Date: February 24, 2009                      By: /s/ Michael Noble
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Michael Noble
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                                 Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO andCFO**

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

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Real Estate Associates Limited III (the"Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven D.Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, andStephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 

 

 

This certification isfurnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2000 for  Hallwood  Energy  Corporation  and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000319019
<NAME>                        Hallwood Energy Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         15,498
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  21,527
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               38,237
<PP&E>                                         760,932
<DEPRECIATION>                                 591,820
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 208,676
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          25,580
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    21,083
<COMMON>                                       100
<OTHER-SE>                                     57,733
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   208,676
<SALES>                                        21,656
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               21,809
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  5,482
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,395
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                4,953
<INCOME-TAX>                                   548
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            4,405
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   4,405
<EPS-BASIC>                                    .38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .38




</TABLE>
----

----

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  August 16, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Thomas J. Meaney                                                                    |   |
|-----------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                  |   | Thomas J. MeaneyPresident (Principal ExecutiveOfficer and Principal  Financial Officer) |   |
#### Alexandria Greco, Appellant, v Starbucks Coffee Company et al., Respondents.

[873 NYS2d 639]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), dated November 14, 2007, as granted the separate motions of the defendants Starbucks Coffee Company and 29 Park Place, LLC, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The plaintiff alleges that she sustained injuries when she *682slipped and fell on an accumulation of water on the floor of a café operated by the defendant Starbucks Coffee Company (hereinafter Starbucks) at premises owned by the defendant 29 Park Place, LLC (hereinafter 29 Park Place).

“An out-of-possession landlord is not liable for injuries sustained on the premises unless the landlord retains control of the premises or is contractually obligated to perform maintenance and repairs” *(Seney v Kee Assoc.,*15 AD3d 383, 384 [2005]). Here, 29 Park Place, the out-of-possession landlord of the subject premises rented by Starbucks, established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that it relinquished control of the leased premises, was not obligated under the terms of the lease to maintain or repair the premises, and did not violate a specific statutory provision *(see O'Connell v L.B. Realty Co.,*50 AD3d 752 [2008]; *Gavallas v Health Ins. Plan of Greater N.Y.,*35 AD3d 657, 658 [2006]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the allegedly dangerous condition constituted a specific statutory violation *(id.; see Stein v Harriet Mgt., LLC,*51 AD3d 1007 [2008]; *Couluris v Harbor Boat Realty, Inc.,*31 AD3d 686 [2006]).

Starbucks established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by presenting evidence that it neither created nor had actual or constructive notice of the accumulation of water *(see Roveccio v Oak Park at Douglaston Unit Owners Assn., Inc.,*51 AD3d 999 [2008]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Madrid v City of New York,*42 NY2d 1039 [1977]; *Jaffe v New York City Tr. Auth.,*52 AD3d 784 [2008]; *Bernhard v Bank of Montreal,*41 AD3d 180 [2007]; *Perlongo v Park City 3 & 4 Apts., Inc.,*31 AD3d 409, 411 [2006]). The affidavit of the plaintiff’s expert was merely speculative and without probative value *(see Lee v City of New York,*40 AD3d 1048 [2007]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is without merit *(see Martin v City of Cohoes,*37 NY2d 162 [1975]). Skelos, J.E, Dillon, McCarthy and Eng, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of City of Syracuse, Respondent, v S & S Environmental, Appellant.

[826 NYS2d 541]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Anthony J. Paris, J.), entered July 27, 2005 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75. The order granted the petition for a permanent stay of arbitration.

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

Memorandum; Petitioner, City of Syracuse, commenced this proceeding to stay the arbitration demanded by respondent, S & S Environmental, pursuant to its contract with petitioner for the abatement of asbestos and demolition of a building formerly owned by petitioner. We agree with petitioner that the subject contract is invalid because it was executed by petitioner’s Commissioner of the Department of Community Development, who did not have the legal authority to do so, and the contract was never ratified by petitioner’s Common Council *(see*General Municipal Law § 103 [1]; Syracuse City Charter § 5-206C). We thus conclude that Supreme Court properly granted the petition for a permanent stay of arbitration.

Finally, we do not address respondent’s remaining contentions. Present—Hurlbutt, J.E, Gorski, Centra and Green, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The accompanying note are an integral part of the consolidated financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          49,089
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  230,692
<ALLOWANCES>                                    42,125
<INVENTORY>                                     51,589
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               356,737
<PP&E>                                         318,046
<DEPRECIATION>                                 180,669
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,371,442
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,894,168
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          635,600
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        66,706
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,371,442
<SALES>                                        816,020
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               816,020
<CGS>                                          969,798
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  969,798
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,941,024
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              54,846
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,181,451)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,181,451)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,181,451)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.33)
        

</TABLE>