alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Estate of James J. Brennan, Also Known as James John Brennan, Deceased. Kevin F. Brennan, as Temporary Executor of James J. Brennan, Deceased, Appellant. Francis O’Dowd, Respondent.

[976 NYS2d 896]

Spain, J.

Appeal from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Greene County (Pulver Jr., S.), entered November 9, 2012, which, among other things, granted respondent’s motion to revoke the preliminary letters testamentary issued to petitioner and appoint respondent as temporary administrator of the estate of James J. Brennan.

James J. Brennan (hereinafter decedent) died testate on January 4, 2009. Petitioner and respondent were among his nephews, and decedent named petitioner as executor of his estate. Petitioner sought to probate the will and was issued preliminary letters testamentary by Surrogate’s Court *(see*SCPA 1412). Objections were filed to the will by, among others, respondent. Thereafter, respondent moved for various relief, including the revocation of petitioner’s preliminary letters *(see*SCPA 711 [2]). In November 2012, the court initially found, based on the papers submitted, that respondent had met his burden of showing that petitioner had wasted or improperly applied the assets of the estate and that the hostility between the parties threatened to interfere with the administration of the estate, and revoked petitioner’s preliminary letters and issued temporary letters of administration to respondent *(see*SCPA 901 [1]). Petitioner appeals and argues, among other things, that the court erred in failing to conduct a hearing prior to rendering its decision. We stayed the order of the court pending appeal (2013 NY Slip Op 62038[U] [2013]).

A trial in the probate proceeding was conducted during the pendency of this appeal, following which, by decree dated *1249December 13, 2013, Surrogate’s Court dismissed the objections, admitted decedent’s will to probate and issued letters testamentary to petitioner (see SCPA 1414 [1]). This recent decree operates to automatically revoke and extinguish respondent’s authority under the temporary letters of administration (see SCPA 1413; *Matter of Durban,*175 App Div 688, 689 [1916], *affd*220 NY 589 [1917]; *Hastings v Tousey,*123 App Div 480, 482-483 [1908]). Thus, petitioner is no longer aggrieved. While respondent remains concerned over the alleged dissipation of estate assets, petitioner is a fiduciary in his role as executor and may, for good cause and at any time, be compelled by the court to file an accounting *(see*SCPA 2205, 2206). Under these circumstances, the appeal is moot, and we do not perceive this case as falling within the exception to the mootness doctrine *(see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne,*50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]; *Matter of Horton,*255 AD2d 642, 643 [1998]; *Matter of O’Brien,*204 AD2d 983, 983-984 [1994]). Accordingly, the appeal should be dismissed.

Stein, J.P, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                     394,269
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                            1,480,670
<ALLOWANCES>                                48,232
<INVENTORY>                                264,982
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         2,930,217
<PP&E>                                   5,209,531
<DEPRECIATION>                           2,185,833
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           8,066,442
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    3,078,437
<BONDS>                                    790,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    2,534,100
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                   223,182
<OTHER-SE>                                 625,864
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             8,066,442
<SALES>                                  2,564,928
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         2,564,928
<CGS>                                    1,917,956
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            1,917,956
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           491,187
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            18,025
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         363,163
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (225,403)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (225,403)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                              (225,403)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (0.04)
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-2051

HERBERT HAYES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BURTON & SUE, L.L.P.; GARY K. SUE; TEAGUE, ROTENSTREICH, 

STANALAND, FOX & HOLT; JEREMY A. KOSIN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:09-cv-00391-NCT-PTS)

Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 2, 2011

Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Herbert Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Walter K. Burton, BURTON & 

SUE, LLP, Greensboro, North Carolina; Paul Anthony Daniels, 

TEAGUE, ROTENSTREICH, STANALAND, FOX & HOLT, LLP, Greensboro, 

North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Herbert Hayes appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Hayes v. Burton & Sue, 

LLP, No. 1:09-cv-00391-NCT-PTS (M.D.N.C. Sept. 1, 2010). 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.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR PERIOD ENDED MAY 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   500
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              800
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        50,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    (50,300)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       500
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,664
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   899
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    765
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                765
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       765
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3252 

To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 

limit the liability of a State performing reclamation work under an 

approved State abandoned mine reclamation plan. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 22, 2010 

Mr. TESTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 

of 1977 to limit the liability of a State performing reclamation work under an approved State abandoned mine 

reclamation plan. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STATE LIABILITY UNDER A RECLAMATION PRO4 GRAM. 

5 Section 405(l) of the Surface Mining Control and 

6 Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1235(l)) is amended 

7 by striking subsection (l) and inserting the following: 

8 ‘‘(l) STATE LIABILITY.— 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3252 IS

1 ‘‘(1) DEFINITION OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE.—In 

2 this subsection, the term ‘gross negligence’ means 

3 reckless, willful, or wanton misconduct by a State. 

4 ‘‘(2) LIABILITY.—No State shall be liable under 

5 any provision of Federal law for any costs or dam6 ages incurred as a result of action taken or omitted 

7 in the course of carrying out a State abandoned 

8 mine reclamation plan under this section, including 

9 reclamation activities conducted by a State pursuant 

10 to a State abandoned mine reclamation plan ap11 proved under this section. 

12 ‘‘(3) EXCEPTIONS.—This subsection shall not 

13 preclude liability for any costs or damages incurred 

14 as a result of gross negligence or intentional mis15 conduct by the State.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Stephen P. Slay, certify that:





| | 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of American Locker Group Incorporated;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





| | 3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|                       |  |  |  |     |  |                              
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: October 11, 2013 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/ STEPHENP. SLAY           
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Stephen P. Slay              
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

# TIME AND DATE: 

10 a.m., Thursday, June 25, 2009. 

# PLACE: 

The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. 

# STATUS: 

Open. 

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

                        The Commission will hear oral argument in the matter                         *Secretary of Labor*                         v.                         *Musser Engineering, Inc., and PBS Coals, Inc.,*                         Docket Nos. PENN 2004-152 and PENN 2004-158. (Issues include whether                               ( print page 28493)                            Musser and PBS violated 29 CFR 75.1200 when the operator of the Quecreek mine failed to maintain an accurate mine map showing the boundaries of adjacent abandoned mine workings, whether the alleged violations were “significant and substantial,” whether the companies were guilty of gross negligence, and whether the Administrative Law Judge properly increased the proposed penalty amounts.)                     

Any person attending this oral argument who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d). 

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Jean Ellen (202) 434-9950 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free. 

Jean H. Ellen, 

Chief Docket Clerk.

[FR Doc. E9-14284 Filed 6-12-09; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE P
EX-10.2


  Exhibit 10.2

  ADDENDUM

   TO SEPARATION AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE OF CLAIMS

  This ADDENDUM (this “Addendum”) TO SEPARATION AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE OF CLAIMS (the “Agreement”) is entered into by and between Zevia PBC, a Delaware public benefit corporation (the “Company”), and William D. Beech (“Employee”). Employee and the Company are each referred to herein as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

  WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12 of the Agreement, the Parties may amend the Agreement in writing agreed to and signed by both Parties;

  WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, Employee’s employment with the Company terminated effective as of May 6, 2022 (such actual date of termination, the “Separation Date”);

  WHEREAS, this Addendum corrects an administrative error contained in the Agreement.  

  NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by Employee and the Company, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

  That the second WHEREAS clause in the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:

  “WHEREAS, as of the Separation Date, the following equity awards of the Company remain outstanding: (i) options to purchase 26,151 shares of Class A common stock of the Company (the “Options”) pursuant to those certain Unit Option Agreements dated May 9, 2018 and July 17, 2020 and the Zevia LLC 2011 Unit Incentive Plan (collectively, the “Option Agreements”) and (ii) 75,000 vested restricted stock units pursuant to that certain Notice of Restricted Class C Common Unit Award and Restricted Class C Common Unit Agreement dated March 17, 2021 and the Zevia 2020 Incentive Plan (collectively, together with the Option Agreements, the “Award Agreements”);”

  All capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning assigned to them in the Agreement. Except as expressly amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.

    

   

   

   

   

   

   

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Addendum as of the dates set forth beneath their names below, effective for all purposes as provided above.

   

  

   

   

  						 

  EMPLOYEE

   

  /s/ William D. Beech					

  William D. Beech

   

  					 

   

   

  ZEVIA PBC

   

  By: /s/ Soley Van Lokeren				

  Name: Soley Van Lokeren

  Title: Sr. VP, People					

   

   

  A-2
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
        (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,
                               UNITED STATES CODE)

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350,  Chapter 63 of Title 18,  United States Code),  the
undersigned  officer  of ASI  Technology  Corporation  (the  "Company"),  in his
capacity and as of the date set forth below, does hereby certify with respect to
Amendment  No. 1 to the  Annual  Report of the  Company  on Form  10-KSB for the
fiscal year ended  December 31, 2004 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission (the "10-KSB Report") that to his knowledge:

         (1) the Amendment  No. 1 to the 10-KSB  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  Amendment  No. 1 to the 10-KSB
Report fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial  condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  April 25, 2005

                                                      /s/ JERRY E. POLIS
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Jerry  E.  Polis,  President  and
                                             Principal  Executive  Officer  of
                                             ASI Technology Corporation
Exhibit 10.1a



Under the Company's 1996 Senior  Management  Variable Pay Plan, the President of
the Company,  with the approval of the Human Resources Committee of the Board of
Directors,   annually  designates  employees  to  participate  in  the  program,
establishes  their  participation  level, and establishes  certain financial and
operational  goals for the Company which must be satisfied in order for variable
pay awards to be made. The impact, if any, of each employee's performance on his
or her variable pay award is determined by his or her officer.  Subject to final
approval  by the  Human  Resources  Committee  of the  Board of  Directors,  the
President of the Company also  determines  at year-end the degree to which those
goals  have been  satisfied  and the  amount of  variable  pay to be  awarded to
participating employees, if any.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          36,007
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,792
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,984
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                64,647
<PP&E>                                         842,832
<DEPRECIATION>                                 335,663
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 606,210
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           70,311
<BONDS>                                        379,837
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        22,328
<OTHER-SE>                                     109,523
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   606,210
<SALES>                                        392,745
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               392,745
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  364,678
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,307
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,306
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,001
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,001
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 12(c)Entergy Louisiana, LLCComputation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges andRatios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Distributions2003
2004
2005
2006
2007Fixed charges, as defined:Total Interest
$76,756
$74,141
$85,418
$92,216
$85,729Interest applicable to rentals
6,359
5,595
4,585
4,833
7,074Total fixed charges, as defined
$83,115
$79,736
$90,003
$97,049
$92,803Preferred distributions, as defined (a)
-
-
-
10,906
10,998Combined fixed charges and preferred distributions, as defined
$83,115
$79,736
$90,003
$107,955
$103,801Earnings as defined:Net Income
$146,154
$127,495
$128,082
$137,618
$143,337Add:Provision for income taxes:Total Taxes
97,408
79,475
96,819
78,338
83,494Fixed charges as above
83,115
79,736
90,003
97,049
92,803Total earnings, as defined
$326,677
$286,706
$314,904
$313,005
$319,634Ratio of earnings to fixed charges, as defined
3.93
3.60
3.50
3.23
3.44Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges andpreferred distributions, as defined
-
-
-
2.90
3.08------------------------(a) "Preferred distributions," as defined by SEC regulation S-K, are computed by dividing the preferred distribution
      requirement by one hundred percent (100%) minus the income tax rate.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

LUCAS JOSEPH CABASSA, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 324 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 24th day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.