alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Kamaljit Kaur, Respondent, v Gurdeep Singh, Appellant.

[978 NYS2d 299]

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Gurdeep Singh appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Queens County (Fitzmaurice, J.), dated December 22, 2011, which, after a fact-finding hearing, and upon a finding that he committed the family offenses of assault in the second degree, menacing in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the second degree, directed him, inter alia, to stay away from the petitioner for a period up to and including November 18, 2016.

Ordered that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In a family offense proceeding, the allegations asserted in a petition seeking the issuance of an order of protection must be supported by *“a*fair preponderance of the evidence” (Family Ct Act § 832; *see Matter of Hasbrouck v Hasbrouck,*59 ADSd 621 [2009]; *Matter of Patton v Torres,*38 AD3d 667, 668 [2007]; *Matter of Dabbene v Dabbene,*297 AD2d 812 [2002]; *Matter of Hogan v Hogan,*271 AD2d 533 [2000]). The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and that court’s determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal and will not be disturbed if supported by the record *(see Matter of Luke v Luke,*72 AD3d 689 [2010]; *Matter of Holder v Francis,*67 AD3d 679 [2009]; *Matter of Sblendorio v D’Agostino,*60 AD3d 773 [2009]; *Matter of Fernandez v Pacheco,*59 AD3d 542, 543 [2009]).

At a fact-finding hearing before the Family Court, it was established by a fair preponderance of the evidence that the appellant committed the family offenses of assault in the second *934degree (see Family Ct Act § 812 [1]; Penal Law § 120.05), menacing in the second degree (see Penal Law § 120.14 [2]), and reckless endangerment in the second degree (see Penal Law § 120.20). Further, the Family Court’s finding that aggravating circumstances were present was supported by the record (see *Matter of Kaur v Singh,*101 AD3d 877, 878 [2012]; *Matter of Hassett v Hassett,*4 AD3d 527 [2004]; *Matter of Reilly v Reilly,*254 AD2d 361, 362 [1998]). Accordingly, the Family Court properly issued an order of protection directing the appellant to stay away from the petitioner for a period of five years (see Family Ct Act § 842). Skelos, J.R, Leventhal, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2



Certification



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:

> (1) I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.  (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;
> 
> (2) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
> 
> (3) The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.

|By:    | Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation                         
|------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|       | General Partner                                                   
|       |                                                                   
|       | /S/ Kelly Tucek                                                   
|       |                                                                   
|Name:  | Kelly Tucek                                                       
|Title: | Vice President of the General Partner and                         
|       | principal financial officer of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.
|Date:  | May 10, 2005
EXHIBIT 10(iii).6

BALDOR ELECTRIC COMPANY

BONUS PLAN

FOR OFFICERS

Plan Administration

The Board of Directors of the Company has sole responsibility for installation, review, and revision of the Plan and all its provisions, at their discretion, including year-to-year implementation of the plan.

Plan Participants

Participants include the
Officers of the Company as designated by the Board of Directors. Participation in the Plan does not constitute a guarantee of employment and incentive awards for plan participants whose employment is terminated for any reason may forfeit
their rights to the Bonus. Participants who retire or go on disability during the plan year will receive a prorated portion of their bonus earned.

Bonus Payment Date

The bonus will be paid in a lump sum as soon as practical after the Companys financial results for the year
have been certified by the outside auditors.

Bonus Formula For The Year

The formula used in the Plan is based on the Companys Sales and Profit Plan for each year the Plan is implemented. The formula is constructed so a bonus (using the percentage (%) as defined below) of base
compensation will be paid on a segment when that segments goal of the approved Company Plan is met. The formula for 2007 will have two independent segments made up of two components as specified below.

Bonus Formula



|          |  |                                      |  |      |          |   |         |   |          |  
|--------- |  | ------------------------------------ |  | ---- | -------- | - | ------- | - | -------- | -
|          |  |                                      |  | Plan |          |   | Stretch |  
|Segment 1 |  | Sales                                |  | $    | xxx.xx   |   |         | $ | xxx.xx   |  
|          |  | Bonus based on sales goals           |  |      | 5        | % |         |   | 5        | %
|          |  |                                      | 
|Segment 2 |  | Earnings per share                   |  | $    | x.xx EPS |   |         | $ | x.xx EPS |  
|          |  | Bonus based on financial performance |  |      | 5        | % |         |   | 5        | %

Segment 1  Sales Goals

The sales component will provide 50% of the Bonus Formula. For sales below Plan, 0% is earned. For sales at or above Plan, the bonus will be paid on a straight line pro-rata basis up to the percentages
indicated as Stretch. For sales above Stretch, the bonus will be paid on a straight line pro-rata basis based on the ratio of Sales between Plan and Stretch.

Segment 2  Financial Performance

The earnings component will
provide 50% of the Bonus Formula. For earnings below Plan, 0% is earned. For earnings at or above Plan, the bonus will be paid on a straight line pro-rata basis up to the percentages indicated as Stretch. For earnings above
Stretch, the bonus will be paid on a straight line pro-rata basis based on the ratio of earnings between Plan and Stretch.
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 Atlas America Public #15-2006 (B) L.P.
(the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Matthew A. Jones, Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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
      Partnership.





By:
            /s/ Matthew A.
      JonesName:
            Matthew
      A. JonesTitle:
            Chief
      Financial Officer of the Managing General PartnerDate:
            November
      13, 2008
[971 NE2d 859, 948 NYS2d 578]

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tony William, Appellant.

Argued May 2, 2012;

decided June 12, 2012

*892APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP,*New York City *(Jonathan K. Chang, Edmond Polubinski, III,*and *Jonathan Stroble*of counsel), and *Office of the Appellate Defender (Richard M. Greenberg*and *Rosemary Herbert*of counsel) for appellant.

*Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney,*New York City *(Andrew E. Seewald*and *Vincent Rivellese*of counsel), for respondent.

*893OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Whether the circumstances of a particular case rise to the level of reasonable suspicion presents a mixed question of law and fact that is beyond our review if the determination has record support *(see People v Pines,*99 NY2d 525, 527 [2002]). In this case, although different conclusions may have been reasonable at the fact-finding level, record evidence supports the lower courts’ determination that the police possessed reasonable suspicion and our review therefore ends *(see People v Hicks,*68 NY2d 234, 238 [1986]). Similarly, “[w]hether a showup is reasonable under the circumstances and/or unduly suggestive are mixed questions of law and fact” *(People v Gilford,*16 NY3d 864, 868 [2011]). The determinations of the courts below that the showup was reasonable and not unduly suggestive are supported by the record and are likewise beyond our further review.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.
wo “nsen0.C 2, 440-03
Ses) 0905— $3 '
ps76o/—101z
WRIT NO. 2OT=T2=0209=

RECEIVED IN

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
JUL 15 255

AbeiAcosia,Clert

IN THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL. APPEALS
AT AUSTIN, TEXAS

IN RE: Martinez. Petronilo, RELATOR

ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR*WRIT OF MANDAMUS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL
APPEALS:

-Petronile,>RELATOR, In the -instant cause and“prays..

that the court will grant his original application for writ on“Mandamus’ and
would show the following:

I...

On December 31, 2014,: pursuant to Tex. Crimal Proc. Code. article 11-07,
Relator filed his post-conviction habeas corpus application challenging his
convictions in The State of Texas v: Martinez, Petronilo,. cause number OAS"

TSSSrSe==R in the 242nd District Court of Hale County.

B1lGO43-0905—

BS Pb) — leit ; I. . -
On December 31st, 2014 same pursuant to art. 11.07 filed by relator on the
above date mentioned to have been filed. to the 242nd District Court to having
only received a response from HALE. COUNTY. CLERK allowing relator’ to. acknowledge

the court received The Writ of Habeas Corpus, art, 11.07.

III.
In the pursuant to Writ of Habeas Corpus. art'11.07. concerning The States
failure to respond to Relator Writ in Designation Issues seeked by filing
of the above mentioning of Writ of Habeas Corpus. article 11.07.


Iv.
To my knowledge. there was never any Order Issued. directing 1rial Counsel
to file an Affidavit within 30 days of December 3lst, 2014.

As of this date, no.affidavit by counsel has been filed to my knowledge and
the habeas corpus application are classified as inactive by the HALE COUNTY
CLERK. The HALE COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK: District attorney and Judge, has
each failed to the Writ of Habeas Corpus entitlement to receive a response
as neither has responded and the Issues Submitted in Petition of the relator
remain previously unresolved.

Matinez complains that Respondent, the Honorable. presiding Judge ot the
242nd District Court has violated two ministerial duties. First contrary
to art. 11.07 more than 35 days have elapsed and the application have yet
“to be forwarded to this Court.

Aastine2, Pelton o, Lelator
Meconne|l uwaet
Bool >. Euxly Oe
Beevile Tef4S Fylo>
TID. # 17-9764


y ct
Che Sao

Bs 76El-(01U_
WRIT NO. O7=T2-OTET=CR

IN THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
AT AUSTIN, TEXAS

IN RE Martinez, Petronilo

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE
ORIGINIAL APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL

APPEALS:

COMES NOW, Martinez, Petronilo, RELATOR, In the instant cause and prays
the court will grant his Motion for Leave to file the attached original
application for Writ of Mandamus.

wee Respectfully Submitted,

Martinez. Petronilo7
McConnell. Unit
3001'S. Emily’ Dr.
Beeville, Texas 78102
T.D.C.J.# 1787690
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 on Form 10-Q of FGX International Holdings Limited (the "Company") for the
three months ended April 4, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony Di Paola, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



May 13, 2009

/s/ ANTHONY DI PAOLA Anthony Di Paola Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial officer and principal accounting officer)


---



QuickLinks
.. , RECEIVED IN

NO. Wo^H COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

„ „ , JUL 07 2015

\<tf\z E$ca ante A t.....,^ Pro <e 9 IN THE COURT or

v, . $ •• AbelAcoste,Clerk

T-H£!St.ATT-Of TEXAS f , „'

5 OfT£.XAS

FILED IN

»* e i. C0UF1T OF CRIMINAL APPEALS PRO Sfc^toT.WK Poe EXTENSION OF T» M6

I^ii^teilim££4 P>scn£,Tt6M»jfer,ijto>:ey JUL 10 2015

TO TH£ HONWADtE CO ^1 Of CRi M,^t Af PEALS: Abel Acosta, Cierk

^pecH^llv „««** Hon**ble Gurf*<*W#*** ft, *«*, *• App.ll.rfs Pel,t,w ft,

©l*«ll«*r<, (**,**,,„ +U cau^d I. 9upPod Wof «*,l,f *„,* «*. CoU(i ^

following:

I. The ^ykand/mnbfr c-dhlscasv?in iteCourt ofAppeals,is (Uftfe ^fg^y y

.,,;;:„ ;2* ., fy*dtf*fri nui.ybere^foe-gase «n '&>ffiat court fr; ff^ flo^ of 7?^g^

•i»fc4sfiatepfe,.qiyflP. tJft.|-.U^.-.;;V^fW^g£L^ft3f$ eS"of

*..:.<..= .-v--. "4'* ty#%* ***COnvi^of^ felony offend of A<L9CA/

y^r?Cor^fiAP^emW;a,/V»g,w•^,3lT^aurT^.o^^^. ,•' •::^gf^:^'-'^:^ 1; ' '^:;":' "•'"•''-• Ji'v"';: A

i4rf A; -:..;$# .^♦^SiwM^ lHe: CSunl ofAppeal* on Jarie \o.lo\ti

•*57f'

0
EXHIBIT 32.2
------------



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


      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Landauer, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, James M. O'Connell, 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 and
belief:

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

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

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


                              /s/ James M. O'Connell
                              ----------------------------------------
                              James M. O'Connell
                              Chief Financial Officer



May 8, 2006
Growth in Gaming Revenues in Past 10 Years

 ($ in Billions)

Source: National Indian Gaming Commission
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 322 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 322

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to equalize the exclusion 
from gross income of parking and transportation fringe benefits and to 
provide for a common cost-of-living adjustment, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 26, 2009

 Mr. Schumer (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Carper, Mr. Menendez, Mr. 
Kennedy, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. 
  Bingaman, Mr. Cardin, and Mr. Lautenberg) 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 equalize the exclusion 
from gross income of parking and transportation fringe benefits and to 
provide for a common cost-of-living adjustment, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Commuter Benefits Equity Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. UNIFORM DOLLAR LIMITATION FOR ALL TYPES OF TRANSPORTATION 
              FRINGE BENEFITS.

    (a) In General.--Section 132(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to limitation on exclusion) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``$100'' in subparagraph (A) and inserting 
        ``$230'', and
            (2) by striking ``$175'' in subparagraph (B) and inserting 
        ``$230''.
    (b) Inflation Adjustment Conforming Amendments.--Subparagraph (A) 
of section 132(f)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
inflation adjustment) is amended--
            (1) by striking the last sentence,
            (2) by striking ``1999'' and inserting ``2009'', and
            (3) by striking ``1998'' and inserting ``2008''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008.

SEC. 3. CLARIFICATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.

    Section 7905 of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)--
                    (A) in paragraph (2)(C) by inserting ``and'' after 
                the semicolon;
                    (B) in paragraph (3) by striking ``; and'' and 
                inserting a period; and
                    (C) by striking paragraph (4); and
            (2) in subsection (b)(2)(A) by amending subparagraph (A) to 
        read as follows:
                    ``(A) a qualified transportation fringe as defined 
                in section 132(f)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
                1986;''.
                                 <all>
```
ASSIGNMENT
AND ASSUMPTION OF RIGHTS UNDER

SHOPPING CENTER PURCHASE AGREEMENT


 


For good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, THE PHILLIPS EDISON GROUP LLC, an Ohio limited liability
company (“Assignor”), hereby assigns, transfers and sets over to NORTHCROSS STATION LLC (“Assignee”), all
of Assignor’s right, title, and interest as Purchaser in and to that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated May 6, 2013,
as same may have been or may be amended, including any addendum thereto (“Agreement”) with NORTHCROSS PROPERTY, LLC
(“Seller”), as Seller, with respect to the land and improvements thereon located in Austin, Texas, more particularly
described in the Agreement, including, but not limited to, its right, title and interest in and to the Deposit (as defined in the
Agreement).


 





	Dated:  June 24, 2013	PHILLIPS EDISON GROUP, LLC,
	 	an Ohio limited liability company
	 	 	 
	 	By:	PHILLIPS EDISON LIMITED
	 	 	PARTNERSHIP,
	 	 	a Delaware limited partnership,
	 	 	Managing Member
	 	 	 
	 	By:	PHILLIPS EDISON & COMPANY, INC.,
	 	 	a Maryland corporation, General Partner
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Robert F. Myers
	 	 	Robert F. Myers, Chief Operating Officer















 


The undersigned, Assignee,
hereby accepts the foregoing assignment and hereby assumes and agrees to perform all of Assignor’s obligations under the
Agreement and hereby releases, indemnifies and holds Assignor harmless from any loss, cost, liability or expense which may be suffered
by Assignor in connection with such Agreement, except for any such loss, cost, liability or expense resulting from the acts of
Assignor in connection with the Agreement taken prior to the date of this Assignment without the applicable authorization or consent
of the undersigned.


 


	Dated:  June 24, 2013	NORTHCROSS STATION LLC, 
	 	A Delaware limited liability company 
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Joe Schlosser
	 	 	Joe Schlosser, Vice President
# Publications about Traumatic Events

Helping Children and Adolescents Cope With Traumatic Events

This fact sheet presents information on how children and adolescents respond to traumatic events, and what family, friends, and trusted adults can do to help.

En español

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

This brochure provides information about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) including what it is, who develops PTSD, symptoms, treatment options, and how to find help for yourself or someone else who may have PTSD.

En español
Exhibit 32(j)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007 (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 as of the dates and for the periods presented in the Report.







|/s/ Jay A. LewisJay A. Lewis
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:	February 28, 2008
#### In the Matter of Edward Koehl, Appellant, v John Lempke, Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility, Respondent.

Decided June 5, 2012

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.