alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Patricia Notskas, Respondent, v Longwood Associates, LLC, et al., Appellants.

[976 NYS2d 176]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bruno, J.), dated September 5, 2012, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

The plaintiff allegedly sustained injuries when she was struck by an overhead soffit which fell from the ceiling at premises leased to the plaintiffs employer, which is not a party to this action. The plaintiffs employer leased the premises from the defendants. After the plaintiff commenced this action, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, contending, inter alia, that, as out-of-possession landlords, they could not be held liable for the plaintiffs injuries. The Supreme Court denied the defendants’ motion.

An out-of-possession landlord is not liable for injuries caused by dangerous conditions on leased premises in the absence of a statute or regulation imposing liability, a contractual provision placing the duty to repair on the landlord, or by a course of conduct by the landlord giving rise to a duty *(see Lugo v Austin-Forest Assoc.,*99 AD3d 865, 866 [2012]; *Repetto v Alblan Realty Corp.,*97 AD3d 735, 737 [2012]; *Alnashmi v Certified Analytical Group, Inc.,*89 AD3d 10, 18 [2011]; *Mercer v Hellas Glass Works Corp.,*87 AD3d 987, 988 [2011]). Here, the defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that they were out-of-possession landlords, that they were not contractually obligated to maintain the subject soffit, that they did not endeavor to maintain the soffit, and that they did not owe the plaintiff a duty by virtue of any applicable statute or regulation *(see Lugo v Austin-Forest Assoc.,*99 AD3d at 866-867; *Madry v Heritage Holding Corp.,*96 AD3d 1022, 1023 [2012]; *Vialva v 40 W. 25th St. Assoc., L.P.,*96 AD3d 735, 736 [2012]). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, *600“the failure to submit an affidavit by a person with knowledge of the facts is not necessarily fatal to a motion” where, as here, the moving party submits other proof, such as deposition testimony with an attorney’s affirmation *(Vetrano v J. Kokolakis Contr., Inc.,*100 AD3d 984, 986 [2012]; *see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d at 325; *Oían v Farrell Lines,*64 NY2d 1092, 1093 [1985]; *Maragos v Sakurai,*92 AD3d 922, 923 [2012]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320 [1986]).

The defendants’ remaining contentions need not be reached in light of the foregoing.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Rivera, J.E, Hall, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 4 (Wednesday, January 7, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 711-712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-121]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION


Farm Credit Administration Board; Regular Meeting

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the 
Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), of the regular meeting of the Farm 
Credit Administration Board (Board).

Date and Time: The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the 
offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on 
January 8, 2009, from 9 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its 
business.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roland E. Smith, Secretary to the Farm 
Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056.

ADDRESSES: Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, 
Virginia 22102-5090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Parts of this meeting of the Board will be 
open to the public (limited space available), and parts will be closed 
to the public. In order to increase the accessibility to Board 
meetings, persons requiring assistance should make arrangements in 
advance. The matters to be considered at the meeting are:

Open Session

A. Approval of Minutes
<bullet> December 11, 2008

[[Page 712]]

B. New Business
    <bullet> Auditors' Report on FCA FY 2008/2007 Financial Statements
    <bullet> Registration of Loan Originators Under the Secure and Fair 
Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008
C. Reports
    <bullet> OE Quarterly Report

Closed Session \*\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \*\ Session Closed--Exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(8) and 
(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <bullet> Update on OE Oversight Activities

    Dated: January 5, 2009.
Roland E. Smith,
Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
[FR Doc. E9-121 Filed 1-5-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
EXHIBIT 24.4

 

SI DIAMOND TECHNOLOGY, INC.POWER OF ATTORNEY

SI DIAMOND TECHNOLOGY, INC. ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB

            The undersigned, in hiscapacity as a director of SI Diamond Technology, Inc. (the "Company"), after reviewing the Company's Form 10-KSB, does herebyappoint Douglas P. Baker, his true and lawful attorney to execute in his name, place and stead, in his capacity as a Director ofsaid Company, the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, and all instruments necessaryor incidental in connection therewith, including all amendments, and to file the same with the Securities and Exchange Commission.Said attorney shall have the full power and authority to do and perform, in the name and on behalf of the undersigned, in any andall capacities, every act whatsoever requisite or necessary to be done in the premises, as fully and to all intents and purposes asthe undersigned might or could do in person, the undersigned hereby ratifying and approving the acts of said attorney.

            IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this instrument this 11th day of March, 2003.

                                        /s/ Dr. Robert Ronstadt                                                       Name: Dr. Robert Ronstadt
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 Cistera Networks, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31,
      2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Cynthia Garr, Interim C.F.O. 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 and
      belief:





(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.








/s/    Cynthia
      A. Garr


Cynthia
      A. Garr


Chief
      Financial
      Officer


(Principal
      Financial
      Officer)








January
      25, 2008








A
      signed original of this written
      statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
      acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
      within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 116 

Supporting ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of after school 

programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2006 

Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. 

BURR, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. COCHRAN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. 

REED, Mr. DOMENICI, Mrs. CLINTON, Ms. SNOWE, Mrs. BOXER, Ms. 

MURKOWSKI, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. BURNS, Mr. 

DURBIN, Mr. REID, Mr. AKAKA, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. 

SALAZAR, Mr. KERRY, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. LIEBERMAN, 

Mr. CARPER, Mr. KOHL, Mr. DAYTON, Mr. PRYOR, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. 

FEINGOLD, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, 

Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. SARBANES, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. MARTINEZ, and Mr. SCHUMER) submitted the following concurrent resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Supporting ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration 

of after school programs. 

Whereas high quality after school programs provide safe, 

challenging, engaging, and fun learning experiences to 

help children and youth develop their social, emotional, 

physical, cultural, and academic skills; 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with BILLS
2 

•SCON 116 IS 

Whereas high quality after school programs support working 

families by ensuring that the children in such families are 

safe and productive after the regular school day ends; 

Whereas high quality after school programs build stronger 

communities by involving the Nation’s students, parents, 

business leaders, and adult volunteers in the lives of the 

Nation’s youth, thereby promoting positive relationships 

among children, youth, families, and adults; 

Whereas high quality after school programs engage families, 

schools, and diverse community partners in advancing the 

well-being of the Nation’s children; 

Whereas ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of 

after school programs held on October 12, 2006, promotes the critical importance of high quality after school 

programs in the lives of children, their families, and their 

communities; 

Whereas more than 28,000,000 children in the United States 

have parents who work outside the home and 14,300,000 

children in the United States have no place to go after 

school; and 

Whereas many after school programs across the United 

States are struggling to keep their doors open and their 

lights on: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That Congress supports the goals and ideals 

3 of ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’ a national celebration of after 

4 school programs. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DECEMBER
31, 1999 BALANCE SHEET AND THE STATEMENT OF INCOME AND RETAINED EARNINGS FOR THE
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S DECEMBER 31, 1999 10-K
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-K.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         147,982
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,392,730<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,540,712
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              84,040,712<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,305
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,726,700
<COMMON>                                         2,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  81,306,707<F3>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                84,040,712
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,914,228<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   70,085
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,844,143
<INCOME-TAX>                                    54,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,790,143
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,790,143
<EPS-BASIC>                                     4.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.24
<FN>
<F1>Receivables are due from affiliated companies.
<F2>An investment in preferred shares of Chieftain International (U.S.) Inc., at
cost of $78,500,000 has been included in total assets.
<F3>Additional paid-in capital of $14,998,000 (attributable to common stock) and
$60,676,203 (attributable to preferred stock) has been added to retained
earnings of $5,632,504 in calculating other stockholders' equity.
<F4>Revenues are earned exclusively from transactions with parent company.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Dismissed and Opinion Filed October 25, 2016 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00365-CV 

TAMEKA STAPLES, Appellant 

V. 

E.H. WALSH CCP, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-01350-E 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart 

Opinion by Chief Justice Wright 

The docketing statement and clerk’s record in this case are past due. By postcard dated 

April 1, 2016, we informed appellant the docketing statement in this case was due. We 

cautioned appellant that failure to file the docketing statement within ten days might result in the 

dismissal of this appeal without further notice. By letter dated July 20, 2016, we informed 

appellant the clerk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid for the clerk’s 

record. We directed appellant to provide verification of payment or arrangements to pay for the 

clerk’s record or to provide written documentation she had been found entitled to proceed 

without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the 

dismissal of this appeal without further notice. To date, the clerk’s record has not been filed, 
 –2– 

appellant has not provided the required documentation, nor has appellant otherwise corresponded 

with the Court regarding the status of this appeal. 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c). 

160365F.P05 

 

/Carolyn Wright/ 

CAROLYN WRIGHT 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

 S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

TAMEKA STAPLES, Appellant 

No. 05-16-00365-CV V. 

E.H. WALSH CCP, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 5, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-01350-E. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. 

Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. 

 It is ORDERED that appellee E.H. WALSH CCP recover its costs of this appeal from 

appellant TAMEKA STAPLES. 

Judgment entered October 25, 2016.
No. 920.

#### State Bank of Hardinsburg *v.*Brown et al.

March 30, 1942.

*Mr. Telford B. Orbison*for petitioner. *Messrs. Samuel E. Cook*and *Ulysses E. Lesh*for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted.
# Fifth Amendment to the Coordinated Remedy Order (Extensions)

                                                                          Download file:                       Fifth Amendment to the Coordinated Remedy Order (Extensions)
No. 888.

#### New York ex rel. Smith *v.*Hunt, Warden.

February 16, 1942.

*Stanley Smith, pro se.*

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York, and motion for leave to proceed further *in forma pauperis,*denied.
#### Willie J. WHITE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Colie L. RUSHTON, Warden of McCormick Correctional Institution; Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 06-7361.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 31, 2006.

Decided: Nov. 8, 2006.

Willie J. White, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Derrick K McFarland, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Willie J. White seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as untimely. We *324dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” *Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr.,*434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting *United States v. Robinson,*361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s orders denying his § 2254 petition and his motion for reconsideration were entered on the docket on May 23, 2006 and June 20, 2006, respectively. The notice of appeal was filed on July 21, 2006.* Because White failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*

*

 For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); *Houston v. Lack,*487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 257 

To amend title 11, United States Code, to disallow certain claims resulting 

from high cost credit debts, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 15, 2009 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the following bill; 

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

A BILL 

To amend title 11, United States Code, to disallow certain 

claims resulting from high cost credit debts, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Consumer Credit Fair5 ness Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EFFECTS OF HIGH COST CREDIT ON BANKRUPTCY 

7 PROCEEDINGS. 

8 (a) DEFINITIONS.—Section 101 of title 11, United 

9 States Code, is amended— 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
2 

•S 257 IS

1 (1) by redesignating paragraph (27B) as para2 graph (27C); and 

3 (2) by inserting after paragraph (27A) the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(27B) The term ‘high cost consumer credit 

6 transaction’ means an extension of credit by a ‘cred7 itor’ (as defined in section 103 of the Truth in 

8 Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1602(f))), resulting in a 

9 consumer debt that has an applicable annual per10 centage rate (as determined in accordance with sec11 tion 107(a) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 

12 1606(a)), and including costs and fees incurred in 

13 connection with the extension of such credit) that 

14 exceeds, at any time while the credit is outstanding, 

15 the lesser of— 

16 ‘‘(A) the sum of 15 percent and the yield 

17 on United States Treasury securities having a 

18 30-year period of maturity; or 

19 ‘‘(B) 36 percent.’’. 

20 (b) DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIMS.—Section 502 of title 

21 11, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 

22 the following: 

23 ‘‘(l) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of this 

24 section, the court shall disallow any claim arising from a 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
3 

•S 257 IS

1 high cost consumer credit transaction for the purpose of 

2 distribution under this title.’’. 

3 SEC. 3. EXCLUSION. 

4 Section 707(b) of title 11, United States Code, is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(8) Paragraph (2) shall not apply in the case of a 

7 debtor who has any debts arising from a high cost con8 sumer credit transaction.’’. 

Æ 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> 0
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   11-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          10,626
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,475
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,909
<INVENTORY>                                      3,226
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                83,059
<PP&E>                                          15,620
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,172
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 201,281
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           56,648
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           153
<OTHER-SE>                                      81,752
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   201,281
<SALES>                                         93,444
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                93,444
<CGS>                                           51,387
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   51,387
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                64,484
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                12,973
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,413
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (37,813)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,078)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (32,735)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (32,735)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.56)
        


</TABLE>