alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[972 NYS2d 233]

#### In the Matter of Yves-Merry Telemaque, an Attorney, Respondent. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

First Department,

September 26, 2013

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Jorge Dopico, Chief Counsel, Departmental Disciplinary Committee,*New York City *(Kaylin L. Whittingham*of counsel), for petitioner.

*211
      *Richard Grayson,*for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Yves-Merry Telemaque was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on August 23, 1995. At all times relevant to this proceeding, she maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

In accordance with 22 NYCRR 603.11, the Departmental Disciplinary Committee moves for an order accepting respondent’s affidavit of resignation from the practice of law and striking her name from the roll of attorneys. Respondent has not responded.

Respondent’s affidavit, sworn to on June 20, 2013, complies with section 603.11 in that she states that her resignation is submitted freely, voluntarily and without coercion or duress, that she is fully aware of the implications of submitting her resignation (including that her name will be stricken from the roll of attorneys and she cannot reapply to the New York bar for seven years), that she is aware that there is a pending disciplinary investigation commenced against her alleging that she converted client funds, and that if the Committee brought charges predicated upon the misconduct under investigation, she would be unable to successfully defend herself on the merits against the allegations *(see*22 NYCRR 603.11 [a] [l]-[3]).

Specifically, respondent acknowledges that, with respect to the allegation of conversion,

> “[o]n March 13, 2007, I was appointed successor guardian to Cleo Veal, who later passed away on November 11, 2008. On November 7, 2008, I sold her residence. I deposited the proceeds from the sale which totaled $315,093.44 into my IOLA account. Thereafter, I failed to turn over $214,322.44 entrusted to me from the sale of the decedent’s residence. I was not authorized to use any of the monies for my own personal use, and was obligated to turn over all funds for the decedent to the Queens County Public Administrator.”

Respondent asserts that she is arranging with the Queens County Public Administrator to repay the money she converted and acknowledges that if the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protec*212tion pays out a claim for these converted funds, then she is obligated to reimburse the Fund. Respondent has consulted with counsel of her choice and has determined that it is appropriate to submit her resignation at this time.

Accordingly, the Committee’s motion is granted, respondent’s resignation from the practice of law is accepted, and her name is hereby stricken from the roll of attorneys nunc pro tunc to June 20, 2013.

Renwick, J.E, DeGbasse, Freedman, Richter and ManzanetDaniels, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, nunc pro tunc to June 20, 2013.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 398 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the expensing 

of environmental remediation costs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2005 

Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. BAYH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 

the expensing of environmental remediation costs.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXPANSION OF EXPENSING OF ENVIRON4 MENTAL REMEDIATION COSTS. 

5 (a) PROVISION MADE PERMANENT.—Section 198 of 

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to expensing 

7 of environmental remediation costs) is amended by strik8 ing subsection (h). 

9 (b) EXPANSION OF ELIGIBLE CONTAMINATES.— 
2

•S 398 IS

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 198(c)(1)(B) of the 

2 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified 

3 contaminated site) is amended by striking ‘‘haz4 ardous substance’’ and inserting ‘‘hazardous or toxic 

5 substance, or in which is located 1 or more struc6 tures in which such substance is found or of which 

7 such substance is a part’’. 

8 (2) HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE.—Sec9 tion 198(d)(1) of such Code (defining hazardous 

10 substance) is amended— 

11 (A) by inserting ‘‘or toxic’’ after ‘‘haz12 ardous’’ in the matter preceding subparagraph 

13 (A), 

14 (B) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of sub15 paragraph (A), 

16 (C) by striking the period at the end of 

17 subparagraph (B) and inserting a comma, and 

18 (D) by adding at the end the following new 

19 subparagraphs: 

20 ‘‘(C) any substance which is listed as an 

21 extremely hazardous substance under section 

22 302(a) of the Emergency Planning and Com23 munity Right-to-Know Act of 1986, and 

24 ‘‘(D) any oil (as defined in section 

25 1001(23) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990).’’. 
3

•S 398 IS

1 (3) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

2 (A) Paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 

3 198(b) of such Code are each amended by in4 serting ‘‘or toxic’’ after ‘‘hazardous’’. 

5 (B) Section 198(d)(2) of such Code is 

6 amended by striking ‘‘of such Act’’ and all that 

7 follows and inserting ‘‘of the Comprehensive 

8 Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

9 Liability Act of 1980 by reason of subpara10 graph (A) or (C) of subsection (a)(3) thereof.’’. 

11 (C) The heading for section 198(d) of such 

12 Code is amended by inserting ‘‘OR TOXIC’’ after 

13 ‘‘HAZARDOUS’’. 

14 (c) ELIMINATION OF RECAPTURE ON SALE.—Section 

15 198 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 

16 striking subsection (e) and by redesignating subsections 

17 (f) and (g) as subsections (e) and (f), respectively. 

18 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply to expenditures paid or incurred 

20 after the date of the enactment of this Act in taxable years 

21 ending after such date.

Æ
#### Patel v. Stanley Works Customer Support

Case below: 178 N.C. App. 562

No. 445PA06

1. Defs’ Motion for Temporary Stay (COA05-462)

2. Defs’ Petition for Writ of Supersedeas

3. Defs’ PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. Allowed 08/23/06

2. Allowed 05/03/07

3. Allowed 05/03/07
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.3 CALL-NET ENTERPRISES INC. Annual and Special Meeting of Shareholders
Held on May 4, 2005
REPORT OF VOTING RESULTSPursuant to National Instrument 51-102 Continuous Disclosure Obligations
Section 11.3 BriefDescription
    
    
    Outcomeof
    
    
    of
    
    
    Conducted by BallotMatters
    
    
    the
    
    
    Number or Percentage of Votes CastVoted Upon
    
    
    Vote
    
    
    For
    
    
    Against
    
    
    WithheldIn respect of the
election of the
Directors of the
Company
    
    
    For 
(by show of hands)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Not applicableIn respect of the
re-appointment of
the auditor of the
Company
    
    
    For 
(by show of hands)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Not applicableIn respect of a
resolution
authorizing certain
amendments to the
Companys Incentive
Stock Option
Plan1
    
    
    For 
(in person and by
proxy)
    
    
    
    8,696,092
    
    
    
    
    5,391,750
    
    
    
    N/AIn respect of a
resolution
authorizing certain
amendments to the
Companys
Restricted Stock
Unit
Plan2
    
    
    For 
(in person and by
proxy)
    
    
    
    13,709,906
    
    
    
    
    225,951
    
    
    
    N/A
   1
    
    Voted upon by the holders of Common Shares,
Class B Non-Voting Shares and Preferred Share, voting together as a group,
other than votes attaching to shares owned by insiders to whom options may be
issued pursuant to the Incentive Stock Option Plan and associates of such
persons.




---



##### 



CALL-NET ENTERPRISES INC. Per:
    
    /s/ Janice SpencerName: Janice SpencerTitle: Secretary
   2
exv10w3



 


Exhibit 10.3


Del Monte Foods Company Annual Incentive Plan




     Fiscal 2005 Targeted Percentage and Weighting of Objectives
for Certain Executive Officers as Approved by the Compensation Committee on
September 22, 2004




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	Weighting of Objectives	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	Individual	 	 
	 	 	Targeted Percentage	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	Objectives/	 	 
	 	 	of Fiscal Year	 	Corporate Financial	 	Business Unit	 	Management By	 	Possible Range of
	Name	 	Earnings	 	Objectives	 	Objectives	 	Objectives (MBOs)	 	Score (1)
	
	 	
	 	
	 	
	 	
	 	

	Richard G. Wolford	 	 	110.00	%	 	 	75	%	 	 	—	 	 	 	25	%	 	0-200% of target
	David L. Meyers	 	 	70.00	%	 	 	75	%	 	 	—	 	 	 	25	%	 	0-200% of target
	Nils Lommerin	 	 	70.00	%	 	 	60	%	 	 	—	 	 	 	40	%	 	0-200% of target
	Todd R. Lachman	 	 	70.00	%	 	 	60	%	 	 	—	 	 	 	40	%	 	0-200% of target
	Marc D. Haberman	 	 	62.50	%	 	 	50	%	 	 	10	%	 	 	40	%	 	0-200% of target






	(1)	 	Possible range of scoring for each component (Corporate Financial
Objectives, Business Unit Objectives, Individual Objectives / Management
By Objectives (MBOs)).

Note: the maximum amount payable to any participant for any Plan Year under
the Plan is $2,000,000 or 200% of such participant’s Fiscal Year Earnings,
whichever is less.
Exhibit 35.3

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (Item 1123)

Homecomings Financial, LLC

RAAC Series 2007-SP1 Trust (the Issuing Entity)

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Homecomings Financial, LLC, as servicer (the Servicer) pursuant to the applicable servicing agreement, does hereby certify that:

1. A review of the Servicers activities during the period from and including April 10, 2007 through and including September 24, 2007 and of the
Servicers performance under the applicable servicing agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such
review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable servicing agreement in all material respects throughout such period.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 24th day of March 2008.



|       |  |                     
|------ |  | --------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
|Name:  |  | Anthony N. Renzi    
|Title: |  | Managing Director
EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
connection with the Annual Report of Oldwebsites.com, Inc., (the “Company”) on
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­Richard
Ivanovick, 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:
 
 
 (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.
 
 
 March
      15, 2010
              /s/
      James RoszelJames
      RoszelPresident
EXHIBIT 32.a

                       CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                           18 U.S.C. 1350,

                        AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

             SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Regent Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, David A. Nelson, in my capacity as Chief Executive
Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Date: November 15, 2007           /S/ DAVID A. NELSON
                                      -------------------
                                      David A. Nelson, Chief Executive
                                      Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AT MARCH 31, 1998 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
OPERATION FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
IT'S ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,808,896
<SECURITIES>                                    25,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,862,865
<ALLOWANCES>                                   269,156
<INVENTORY>                                  3,964,739
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,623,650
<PP&E>                                       6,284,742
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,444,109
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,482,703
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,857,942
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         30
<COMMON>                                        62,835
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,910,857
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,482,703
<SALES>                                      6,525,782
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,592,641
<CGS>                                        3,285,497
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,285,497
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,017,439
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             271,235
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,024
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,218
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,806
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,806
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

In connection with Quarterly Report of IRIS International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the six months ended
June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date thereof (the Report), I, Peter L. Donato, 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 the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                     |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 5, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Peter Donato       
|                     |  |  |  | Peter L. Donato        
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 449 Referred in House (RFH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 449

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 14, 2005

                 Referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To facilitate shareholder consideration of proposals to make Settlement 
Common Stock under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act available to 
  missed enrollees, eligible elders, and eligible persons born after 
               December 18, 1971, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT.

    Section 36(d)(3) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 
U.S.C. 1629b) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``(d)(3)'' and inserting ``(3)'';
            (2) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
        ``of this section'' and inserting ``or an amendment to articles 
        of incorporation under section 7(g)(1)(B)'';
            (3) in subparagraph (A)--
                    (A) by striking ``, or'' and inserting ``; or''; 
                and
                    (B) by striking ``such resolution'' and inserting 
                ``the resolution or amendment to articles of 
                incorporation''; and
            (4) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``such resolution'' 
        and inserting ``the resolution or amendment to articles of 
        incorporation''.

            Passed the Senate December 14, 2005.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
Employment Agreement between Exar Corporation and J. Scott Kamsler



 Exhibit 10.29 
 January 18, 2007 
 Dear Scott 
 We are pleased to
offer you a position with Exar Corporation as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, reporting to Roubik Gregorian, President and Chief Executive Officer. Your starting annual salary will be $285,000.00 paid bi-weekly. 
 You will be included in the FY2008 Executive Incentive Compensation Program, which is effective from April 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008. This incentive program is
currently under development, and we expect to be able to provide details of the program within 60 days. Your target award will be 50% of your annual base salary with a maximum payout of 100% of annual base salary. 
 You will be granted 87,500 stock options on the first trade date in the month following your date of hire. Stock options vest 25% per year over a four-year period
and the option price is established as the fair market value of the stock on the day of the grant. You will also be granted 29,167 restricted stock units (RSU’s) which vest 25% per year over a four–year period. In addition, as a
sign-on incentive, you will be granted 6,000 RSU’s which will vest 100% on May 1, 2007. 
 In the event of Change of Control and your position is
eliminated or substantially reduced in responsibility, all of your options and RSU’s will immediately vest. In addition, in the event of Change of Control and your position is eliminated or substantially reduced in responsibility, you will
receive a lump sum severance payment equal to the greater of (a) one year’s base salary or (b) one month’s base salary for each year of completed service, up to a maximum of two (2) times your annual base salary. 

Exar Corporation has a very competitive fringe benefit package that includes a 401(k) Plan and other benefits. We are a progressive and innovative company and believe
that your association with us will be mutually beneficial. 
 If our offer is acceptable, please sign and date in the space provided below and return one
copy to Gene Robles, fax (510) 668-7011 by 5:00 pm on Friday, January 18, 2007. This offer is contingent upon satisfactory completion of our standard background investigation for Company officers and you providing documentation that
satisfies the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. 
 Sincerely, 
  

									
	 Gene Robles
 Director
	 		 	 Agreed and Accepted:
 /s/
J. Scott Kamsler
	 	 January 18, 2007

	Human Resources	 		 	J. Scott Kamsler	 		 	Date                    
				
	CC: Roubik Gregorian	 		 	Start Date:	 	 February 19, 2007
#### Windsor Owners Corp., Respondent-Appellant, v Frank Mazzocchi, Appellant-Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[972 NYS2d 895]

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered August 27, 2012 and May 6, 2013, which, respectively, denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, and denied plaintiff’s motion to strike defendants’ answer and/or for summary judgment for defendants’ failure to comply with a discovery order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*507The motion court properly denied defendants’ motion to dismiss. Defendants’ claims that the instant ejectment action was improperly commenced and was unauthorized under plaintiffs by-laws and the proprietary lease, raise, at most, issues of fact. Mazzocchi’s current claim that the motion court should have, sua sponte, treated defendants’ CPLR 3211 motion to dismiss as one for summary judgment, is unavailing. Defendants never requested that relief below. Even assuming that the parties had requested that the motion be converted to a summary judgment motion, the court gave no notice that it would treat it as such, and the exceptions to the notice requirement are not applicable here *(see Mihlovan v Grozavu,*72 NY2d 506, 508 [1988]). In any event, fact issues remain which would have precluded summary judgment.

The motion court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying plaintiffs motion *(see*CPLR 3126). Defendants proffered a reasonable excuse for the delay in complying with the court’s prior conditional discovery order and demonstrated the existence of a meritorious defense *(see Anderson v Ariel Servs., Inc.,*93 AD3d 525 [1st Dept 2012]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Freedman and Gische, JJ.