alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Khalif Muhammad, Appellant, v New York City Housing Authority, Respondent.

[975 NYS2d 47]

*514Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Wooten, J.), entered February 5, 2013, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny the motion as to plaintiffs claims based on an alleged broken step, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Although plaintiff testified at his General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing that his accident might have been caused by an accumulation of ice on an outdoor stairway, he had earlier filed with defendant a notice of claim that indicated that the accident was also caused by a broken step. Indeed, he later testified at his deposition that the accident was caused by the broken step. The inconsistencies between the section 50-h testimony and the deposition raise issues of credibility that should be properly left for the trier of fact *(see Francis v New York City Tr. Auth.,*295 AD2d 164 [1st Dept 2002]). We reject the argument that the deposition testimony was an attempt to create a feigned factual issue in the face of a motion for summary judgment. The deposition testimony was given a year before the instant motion for summary judgment was made *(compare Morrissey v New York City Tr. Auth.,*100 AD3d 464 [1st Dept 2012]). The motion court also erred in imposing upon plaintiff a burden of demonstrating that defendant had notice of the alleged broken step. Defendant, as a moving party, had the prima facie burden of establishing that it lacked actual or constructive notice of a hazardous condition *(see Rodriguez v 705-7 E. 179th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp.,*79 AD3d 518, 519 [1st Dept 2010]). However, in light of the concession in plaintiffs reply brief and by operation of the storm in progress doctrine, we find that defendant was not negligent in failing to remove any snow and/or ice that was on its premises *(see Pippo v City of New York,*43 AD3d 303, 304 [1st Dept 2007]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.R, Saxe, Moskowitz, DeGrasse and Gische, JJ.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2523 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain electric cooktops. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 30, 2009 

Mr. CORKER (for himself and Mr. ALEXANDER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain electric cooktops. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN ELECTRIC COOKTOPS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2523 IS

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Electric cooktops each measuring approximately 66 cm or 

more but not over 91.44 cm 

in width, weighing approximately 10.3 kg or more but 

not more than 20.9 kg, having either a coil electric cooking element or smooth cooking surface with incorporated 

element with either 4 or 5 

burners (provided for in subheading 8516.60.60) ............. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,435
<ALLOWANCES>                                       609
<INVENTORY>                                     25,938
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                43,447
<PP&E>                                         101,549
<DEPRECIATION>                                (34,925)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 127,962
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,202
<BONDS>                                         49,172
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            71
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,535
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   127,962
<SALES>                                         66,670
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                66,670
<CGS>                                           59,224
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   59,224
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,317
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,760
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,578
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,182
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,182
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .36
        

</TABLE>
#### New York State Psychiatric Association, Inc., et al., Respondents, v New York State Department of Health, Appellant.

Decided July 1, 2010

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine an action or proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
# Court of Appeals
**First District of Texas**

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01

- 13

- 00621

- CV

Angelica Garza Duque

v
.
Wells Fargo, N.A.

NO. 12

- DCV

- 199193 IN THE 400TH DISTRICT COURT OF FORT BEND C OUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

E

- TXGOV FEE
MT FEE E

- TXGOV FEE
E

- TXGOV FEE RPT RECORD CLK RECORD FILING
E

- TXGOV FEE $5.00 $10.00 $5.00 $5.00 $132.00 $1,029.00

$175.00

$5.00 11/22/2013 10/10/2013 10/10/2013 09/23/2013 08/23/2013 08/15/201 3 08/14/2013 08/08/2013 E

- PAID E

- PAID E

- PAID
E

- PAID

PAID
PAID PAID
E

- PAID APE APE APE
ANT ANT
ANT ANT
ANT



### The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are $1,36 7 .00.

Court costs in this case have b een taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine , Clerk o f the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, this May 1 5 , 2015

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM (A)
INTERIM  CONSOLIDATED  BALANCE  SHEETS,  STATEMENTS  OF  OPERATIONS,  CHANGE  IN
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY AND CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH (B)  QUARTERLY  REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED  SEPTEMBER
30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       0
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                0
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             0
<PP&E>                                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        11,498
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                     36,453
<OTHER-SE>                                  (47,991)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 0
<SALES>                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             0
<CGS>                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              0
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          0
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (0)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2489 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2489

   To suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Chloro-6-(methylthio)toluene.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mr. Graham introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Chloro-6-(methylthio)toluene.

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

SECTION 1. 2-CHLORO-6-(METHYLTHIO)TOLUENE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00       2-Chloro-6-         Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/ ''.
                          (methylthio)tolue                                                  31/2011.......
                          ne (CAS No. 82961-
                          52-2) (provided
                          for in subheading
                          2930.90.29)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
The District Court of the 11th Judicial District. County of Flathead.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. DANIEL MILLER, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-09-164C DECISION

On April 29,2010, the defendant was sentenced to fifteen (15) years in the Montana State Prison, with ten (10) years suspended, for the offense of Negligent Homicide, a Felony.

On November 4, 2010, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Jori Frakie. The state was represented by Ed Corrigan.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that “the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless it is deemed clearly inadequate or excessive.” (§46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.

Done in open Court this 4th day of November, 2010.

DATED this 18th day of November, 2010.

Chairperson, Hon. Blair Jones, Member, Hon. Richard Simonton and Member, Hon. Ray Dayton.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GARY LANDERS,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 14

- 00100

- CR

Appeal from the

158 th District Court

of Denton County, Texas

(TC# F

- 2010

- 1639

- B )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, 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
connection with the Quarterly Report of QuantRx Biomedical Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sasha
Afanassiev, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to my knowledge:





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





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





/s/ Sasha AfanassievSasha
      AfanassievCFO,
      Treasurer & VP of Finance





Date:    May
14, 2010





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.
##### 



IDM Pharma, Inc.  2000 Stock Plan
 2008 Retention Compensation plan  Deferred Issuance Restricted Stock Bonus Agreement
 Grant Notice Award Company Plan Effective Date
 1. Vesting .
 2. Number of Shares .
 3. Securities Law Compliance .
 4. Limitations on Transfer .
 5. Dividends.




---



##### 



(a) Date of Issuance.
 (b)
 (c)
 (d) Disability
 6. Restrictive Legends.
 7. Award not a Service Contract .




---



##### 



8. Withholding Obligations.
 (a)
 (b)
 9. Unsecured Obligation.
 10. Notices .
 11. Miscellaneous .
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)
 12. Governing Plan Document .




---



##### 



13. Severability.
 14. Effect on Other Employee Benefit Plans.
 15. Amendment.
EXHIBIT 3.3





CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION FILED TO CORRECT


A CERTAIN ERROR IN THE AMENDED AND RESTATED


CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF


RIBOZYME PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.


FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF


DELAWARE ON APRIL 17, 1996





Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,





DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:





1.  The name of the corporation is Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc.





2.  That an
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc. was filed by the Secretary of State of Delaware on April 17, 1996, and that said Certificate requires correction as permitted by Section 103 of the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.





3.  The inaccuracy or defect of said Certificate to be
corrected is as follows: The par value of the corporations Common Stock and Preferred Stock should have been $0.01 but was misstated as $0.001.





4.  Article IV.A of the Certificate is corrected to read as follows:





The corporation is authorized to issue two classes of stock to be designated, respectively, Common Stock and Preferred Stock. The total number
of shares which the corporation is authorized to issue is twenty-five million (25,000,000) shares. Twenty million (20,000,000) shares shall be Common Stock, each having a par value of $0.01. Five million (5,000,000) shares shall be Preferred Stock,
each having a par value of $0.01.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has caused this Certificate to be
signed by Lawrence E. Bullock, its Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, this 12th day of September 1997.





RIBOZYME PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.By:

/s/    LAWRENCE E.
BULLOCKLawrence E. Bullock, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23.1


                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8, No. 333-05561) pertaining to the 1993 Stock Option Plan and the 1994
Long-Term Performance Incentive Plan, and the Registration Statements (Form S-3
No. 33-95522, Form S-3 No. 333-42419, Form S-3 No. 333-29477, and Form S-3 No.
33-78016) of NaPro BioTherapeutics, Inc. and in the related Prospectuses of our
report dated March 3, 2000 with respect to the consolidated financial statements
of NaPro BioTherapeutics, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1999.

/s/  Ernst & Young LLP
Denver, Colorado
April 14, 2000
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 Quarterly Report of QuantRx Biomedical Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Walter Witoshkin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to my knowledge:

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

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


                              /s/ Walter Witoshkin
                              -------------------------------
                              Walter Witoshkin
                              Chief Executive Officer

Date:    November 15, 2006


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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>                      
The schedule contains summary financial  information  extracted from the balance
sheets and statements of income and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         853,714
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  29,947
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    141,823
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         1,179,125
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,498,019
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,861,710
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,498,019
<SALES>                                        501,248
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,472,290
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,529,569
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               171,539
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             102,551
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                942,721
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            942,721
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   942,721
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  4.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  4.10
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 97 (Thursday, May 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23855-23856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11787]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER09-1090-000; ER09-728-000]


Twin Cities Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

May 13, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Twin Cities Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, 
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes 
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is June 2, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the

[[Page 23856]]

FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic 
service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or 
be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an 
eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling 
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance 
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f0b6b5a2b3bf9e9c999e95a38580809f8284b096958293de979f86"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a8eeedfaebe7c6c4c1c6cdfbddd8d8c7dadce8cecddacb86cfc7de">[email protected]</span></a> 
or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-11787 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>