alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Arnold *et al. v.*Chesebrough.

*{Circuit Court, E. D. New York.*

April 10, 1888.)

Equity—Practice—1Taking Testimony.

The power of the circuit court to appoint special examiners, under the sixty-seventh rule in equity, to take testimony outside of its territorial jurisdiction, is not free from doubt, and the practice is objectionable.

In Equity.. On application for the appointment of a special examiner to take testimony.

*J. II. V. Arnold,*for complainants.

*W. S. Logcm,*.for defendant.'

Lacombe, J.

This is an application for the appointment of a special examiner at Los Angeles, Cal., to take testimony under the sixty-seventh rule in equity. The power of a circuit court to appoint an examiner to act outside of its territorial jurisdiction is not free from doubt. Mr. Justice Bradley, sitting at circuit, has held that it has such power. *Railroad Co.*v. *Drew,*3 Woods, 697. Mr. Justice Blatchford, sitting in this circuit, has repeatedly refused to make such orders as the one now applied for, on the expressed ground of lack of power. Orders appointing special examiners have no doubt since been made here when both parties assented, or where some exceptional and peculiar state of facts was disclosed, but it is not a practice which should be encouraged. No case should come to trial upon evidence as to which there is the slightest doubt that the manner of its taking would sustain a conviction of perjury, if willful false swearing were proved. Where witnesses reside in the district, or within 100 miles of the place of holding the court, their attendance may be compelled before the regular examiner. If they are sick, or live beyond the 100-mile limit, they may be examined by commission; or if an oral examination is deemed more satisfactory, or notice has been given by either party that he desires the evidence to be taken orally, the Revised Statutes (section 863 *et seq.)*provide a simple and efficient mode for taking their testimony. *Bischoffscheim*v. *Baltzer,*10 Fed. 1. To proceed to take testimony before special examiners, sitting, perhaps, in half a dozen different states, under general notices which do not give the names of the witnesses, thus compelling opposing counsel to attend in person, is alike expensive' and unnecessary, and should for that reason be discountenanced, even if there were no doubts as to the power of the court to order the proofs to be taken in that manner. The motion is denied.
```

EXHIBIT 99.1

     Certification  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, As Adopted  Pursuant to
     Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Mark T. Wood,  the Chief  Executive  Officer  of iDial  Networks,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)  the Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended
     December 31, 2002 (the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements  of
     Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
     78m or 78o(d)); and

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

Dated: March 31, 2003

                                          /s/ Mark. T. Wood
                                          -----------------
                                          Name: Mark T. Wood
                                                ------------
                                          Title: Chief Executive Officer
```
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 121 (Thursday, June 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30357-30358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14999]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

June 22, 2009.
    The Department of the Treasury is planning to submit the following 
public information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. 
Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury 
Bureau Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
11020, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before August 24, 2009 
to be assured of consideration.

Office of Foreign Assets Control

    OMB Number: 1505-0170.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Form for OFAC License Applications to Unblock Funds 
Transfers.
    Form: TD-F-90-22.54.
    Description: Assets blocked pursuant to sanctions administered by 
Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) may be released only through a 
specific license issued by OFAC. Since February 2000, use of this form 
to apply for the unblocking of funds transfers has been mandatory 
pursuant to 31 CFR 501.801(b)(2). Use of this form greatly facilitates 
and speeds applicants' submissions and OFAC's processing.
    Respondents: Individuals or households.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 2,500 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Stephanie Petersen, (202) 622-0596, Treasury 
Annex, Room 2141, Washington, DC 20220.

[[Page 30358]]

    OMB Reviewer: OIRA Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 
Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7b1412091a24080e19161208081214153b141619551e140b551c140d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="335c5a41526c4046515e5a40405a5c5d735c5e511d565c431d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>.

Robert Dahl,
Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-14999 Filed 6-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-25-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Daisy Lee, Respondent, v Cornell University et al., Appellants.

[976 NYS2d 85]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (George J. Silver, J.), entered January 29, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint to the extent it alleged that plaintiff suffered serious injuries under the “significant” and “permanent consequential” limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*467Defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action where plaintiff pedestrian was injured when she was struck by a vehicle owned by defendant Cornell University and operated by defendant Fabrikant. Defendants submitted an affirmation of an orthopedist, who examined plaintiff and reviewed her medical records, and concluded that she had not sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

In opposition, plaintiff raised an issue of fact as to her claimed injuries to her cervical and lumbar spines by submitting, inter alia, the affirmation of the orthopedic surgeon who treated her following the accident. The surgeon averred that plaintiff had limitations in range of motion shortly after the accident and upon recent examination, that he had reviewed MRIs taken of the affected areas and found bulging and herniated discs, and that the injuries were caused by the accident. Regarding defendants’ reference to the gap in plaintiffs treatment, plaintiffs doctor concluded, after a series of examinations, that any further treatment would be palliative and prescribed exercises, which plaintiff continues to perform at home *(see Pommells v Perez,*4 NY3d 566, 577 [2005]; *Ayala v Cruz,*95 AD3d 699 [1st Dept 2012]).

As the motion court determined, since plaintiff raised a triable issue with respect to the injuries to her lumbar and cervical spines, it was not necessary to determine whether her other claimed injuries met the threshold *(see Linton v Nawaz,*14 NY3d 821 [2010]). “Once a jury determines that plaintiff has met the threshold for serious injury, the jury may award damages for all of plaintiffs injuries causally related to the accident, even those not meeting the serious injury threshold” *(Rubin v SMS Taxi Corp.,*71 AD3d 548, 549 [1st Dept 2010]). Concur— Tom, J.E, Friedman, Acosta, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.
Exhibit 31.2

Porter Bancorp, Inc.

Rule 13a-14(a) Certification

of Chief Financial Officer

I, David B. Pierce, Chief
Financial Officer of Porter Bancorp, Inc. (the Company), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company;

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;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and

(b) Evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on
such evaluation.



|                         |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 13, 2007 |  | /s/ David B. Pierce    
|                         |  | David B. Pierce        
|                         |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### Charter One Bank, FSB, Successor by Merger to Albank, FSB, Respondent, v Richard F. Mills, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

(Appeal No. 3.)

[976 NYS2d 913]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Genesee County (Robert C. Noonan, A.J.), rendered October 10, 2012. The order denied the motion of defendant Richard F. Mills to vacate a default judgment of foreclosure.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in *Charter One Bank v Mills*(112 AD3d 1338 [2013]). Eresent — Smith, J.E, Fahey, Garni, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

96 

CA 14-00715 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

TERESA A. WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF, 

V ORDER

DAVID KAUFFMAN, DEFENDANT. 

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

DAVID KAUFFMAN, THIRD-PARTY 

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V

 

CYNTHIA M. RANCIER, THIRD-PARTY 

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

BARTH SULLIVAN BEHR, SYRACUSE (J. WILLIAM SAVAGE OF COUNSEL), FOR

THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

LAW OFFICE OF FRED LUTZEN, EAST SYRACUSE (FRED LUTZEN OF COUNSEL), FOR

THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. 

MICHAELS & SMOLAK, P.C., AUBURN (JAN SMOLAK OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Mark H.

Fandrich, A.J.), entered August 5, 2013. The order denied third-party

defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party

complaint. 

Now, upon the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the

attorneys for the parties on December 31, 2014, and filed in the

Cayuga County Clerk’s Office on February 25, 2015,

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed 

without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: July 10, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Proper Power and Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Lior Segal, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to my knowledge that:  (i)  the accompanying Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Act); and  (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  PROPER POWER AND ENERGY, INC.  /s/:  Lior Segal LIOR SEGAL, Chief Financial Officer   May 16, 2011
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT (4)(G)

                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST
                                       OF
                      CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY FINANCING V

         The undersigned, constituting all of the trustees of Consumers Energy
Company Financing V, desiring to form a business trust pursuant to the Delaware
Business Trust Act, 12 Del. C. Section 3801, et seq., hereby certify as follows:

         (a)       Name. The name of the business trust being formed hereby (the
                   "Trust") is "Consumers Energy Company Financing V."

         (b)       Delaware Trustee. The Name and business address of the
                   trustee of the Trust which has its principal place of
                   business in the State of Delaware are as follows:

                   The Bank of New York (Delaware)
                   White Clay Center, Route 273
                   Newark, Delaware  19711

         (c)       Effective Date. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective
                   as of the date of filing with the Secretary of State of the
                   State of Delaware.

Dated:  November 21, 2001

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the Trustees of the Trust,
have executed this Certificate of Trust as of the date first above written.


                                      /s/Alan M. Wright
                                     Alan M. Wright, as Regular Trustee


                                      /s/Thomas A. McNish
                                     Thomas A. McNish, as Regular Trustee



                                     The Bank of New York (Delaware), as
                                                Delaware Trustee


                                     By: /s/William T. Lewis
                                        Name:  William T. Lewis
                                        Title: SVP
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-149]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Earned Income Tax 
Credit Issue Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Earned Income 
Tax Credit Issue Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy 
Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving 
customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be Wednesday, February 11, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey Y. Jenkins at 1-888-912-1227 or 
718-488-2085.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Earned Income Tax 
Credit Issue Committee will be held Wednesday, February 11, 2009, at 1 
p.m. Eastern Time. For information, please contact Ms. Audrey Y. 
Jenkins. Ms. Jenkins may be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 488-
2085. Send written comments to Audrey Y. Jenkins, TAP Office, 10 
MetroTech Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201 or post 
comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org. Due to limited 
conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the 
telephone conference call meeting must be made in advance.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: December 22, 2008.
Roy L. Block,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
 [FR Doc. E9-149 Filed 1-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 10.8

 

REVOLVING NOTE

 

	
$1,000,000.00
    	
Date:   May 30, 2013
    


 

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned (the “Borrowers”), hereby promise to pay to GEMINO HEALTHCARE FINANCE, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Lender”), or its successors or assigns, the principal amount of each Revolving Loan from time to time made in accordance with the provisions of the Credit Agreement dated the date hereof (as amended, restated, extended, supplemented or otherwise modified in writing from time to time, the “Credit Agreement” the terms defined therein being used herein as therein defined), among the Borrowers and Lender.

 

The Borrowers promise to pay interest on the unpaid principal amount of each Revolving Loan from the date of such Revolving Loan until such principal amount is paid in full, at such interest rates and at such times as provided in the Credit Agreement.  All payments of principal and interest shall be made to the Lender in Dollars in immediately available funds.  If any amount is not paid in full when due hereunder, such unpaid amount shall bear interest, to be paid upon demand, from the due date thereof until the date of actual payment (and before as well as after judgment) computed at the per annum rate set forth in the Credit Agreement.

 

This Revolving Note is one of the Revolving Notes referred to in the Credit Agreement, is entitled to the benefits thereof and may be prepaid in whole or in part subject to the terms and conditions provided therein.  This Revolving Note is secured by the Collateral.  Upon the occurrence and during the continuation of one or more of the Events of Default specified in the Credit Agreement, all amounts then remaining unpaid on this Revolving Note shall become, or may be declared to be, immediately due and payable all as provided in the Credit Agreement.  Revolving Loans made by the Lender shall be evidenced by one or more loan accounts or records maintained by the Lender in the ordinary course of business.  The Lender may also attach schedules to this Revolving Note and endorse thereon the date, amount and maturity of its Revolving Loans and payments with respect thereto.

 

The Borrowers, for themselves, their successors and assigns, hereby waive diligence, presentment, protest and demand and notice of protest, demand, dishonor and non-payment of this Revolving Note.

 

THIS REVOLVING NOTE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA.

 

[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank]

 











 

SIGNATURE PAGE TO REVOLVING NOTE

 

	
 
    	
NW 61ST NURSING, LLC
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/ Boyd P. Gentry
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Boyd   P. Gentry, Manager
# Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE)

The NIMH-funded Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) Study was a nationwide public health-focused clinical trial that compared the effectiveness of older (first available in the 1950s) and newer (available since the 1990s) antipsychotic medications used to treat schizophrenia. This page provides information about the study.

### Questions and Answers

                  - Questions and Answers about the NIMH Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness Study (CATIE) — Phase 2 Results, Published April 1, 2006
                  - Questions and Answers about the NIMH Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness Study (CATIE) — Phase 1 Results  (September 2005)

### News about the CATIE Study

                  - Press Release (July 2, 2008): Violence in Schizophrenia Patients More Likely Among Those with Childhood Conduct Problems
                  - Press Release (March 1, 2007): New Details in Schizophrenia Treatment Trial Emerge
                  - Press Release (Dec. 1, 2006): Older Medication May Be More Cost-Effective for Some Patients with Schizophrenia
                  - Press Release (Sept. 19, 2005): NIMH Study To Guide Treatment Choices for Schizophrenia (Phase 1 Results)

### Related Information

                  - NIMH Schizophrenia Page
                  - Director's Update (Dec .1, 2006): NIMH Perspective on Antipsychotic Reimbursement: Using Results from CATIE
                  - Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) from ClinicalTrials.gov **
                  -  Limited Access Dataset from the CATIE Schizophrenia Study
                  - Information on CATIE-Alzheimer's Disease (CATIE-AD), a related study:                     - Science Update (April 15, 2009): Use of Antipsychotics in Alzheimer's Patients May Lead to Detrimental Metabolic Changes
                    - Press Release (Oct. 11, 2006): Antipsychotic Medications Used to Treat Alzheimer's Patients Found Lacking
                  - Other studies being conducted by clinical investigators from the CATIE study team include:                     - Comparison of Antipsychotics for Metabolic Problems in the Treatment of People With Schizophrenia or Schizoaffective Disorder (CAMP) **
                    - The Use of Metformin in the Treatment of Antipsychotic-Induced Weight Gain in Schizophrenia (The METS Study) **
                    - Comparison of Optimal Antipsychotic Treatments for Adults With Schizophrenia **
Court of Appeals, First District

301 Fannin Street

Houston, Texas 77002-2066

RECEIVED

f-IRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

JUL 16 2015

CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK

iJSffilESS

XgCAS

UK

PRSV'Affe*USE

CASE NO. 01-14-00106-CV

HENRY L MAHER

784 STONEBRIDGE AVENUE

ONALA~"A %A" *" "*'"'*

X 773 N7E 100961410007/14/15

! FORWARD TIME EXP R TN TO SEND

MiH£? "HEN'RV L

102 8 EAST AVE H

•ONALASKA V*I 5-4 6 5-©-2 2-6 e

RETURN TO SENDER

I j llltl < • 11 l 1111111111 lilt i ill ii

1l*»Iltl!l-l-IJ,»i,*t,ll'ill,1ll.'f-I,-!li,,lIli,,'l1l-Iil!-i:i41!Hl,'ltl,i.i

$M 02pi^002 $000.48' =••"•• rAf 0001372104 JUL 09 2015

*IL

U.S. POSTAGE» PITNEY BOWES