alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Union Free District #15, Town of Hempstead, Appellant, v Lawrence Teachers Association, Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 767]

In a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 75 to vacate a demand for arbitration served by the respondent and to stay the arbitration, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Davis, J.), entered January 5, 2005, which denied the petition and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In 2002 the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement (hereinafter the stipulation) regarding special education services for children living within Union Free District #15, Town of Hempstead (hereinafter the petitioner). The stipulation provided that if a dispute arose regarding its terms, that dispute would be arbitrable pursuant to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement between the parties. A dispute did, in fact, arise over the stipulation, and the respondent filed a demand for arbitration. The petitioner commenced the instant proceeding to vacate the demand for arbitration and to stay the arbitration, asserting that for public policy reasons, the dispute was not arbitrable. The Supreme Court denied the petition and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration. We affirm.

The Supreme Court properly upheld the arbitration clause contained in the stipulation between the parties. The petitioner failed to identify any authority, either in statutes or in case law, suggesting that there is any public policy against arbitrating the dispute between it and the respondent *(cf. Matter of Union Free School Dist. No. 2 of Town of Cheektowaga v Nyquist,*38 NY2d 137, 144 [1975]). Indeed, a stay of arbitration is reserved for disputes involving “a public policy of the first magnitude” *(Matter of Aimcee Wholesale Corp. [Tomar Prods.],*21 NY2d 621, 625 [1968]; *see Matter of Wertlieb [Greystone Partnerships Group],*165 AD2d 644, 646 [1991]). Further, there is a strong public policy in favor of arbitration *(id.).*The Supreme Court *809properly found that a stay of arbitration was unwarranted since the dispute was one in which the arbitrator could use his or her broad powers to fashion a remedy in keeping with public policy *(see Matter of Port Washington Union Free School Dist. v Port Washington Teachers Assn.,*45 NY2d 411, 418 [1978]). Florio, J.E, Krausman, Luciano and Skelos, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30648-30649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15105]


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

 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11789 and <greek-i>11790]


Alabama Disaster <greek-i>AL-00023

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major

[[Page 30649]]

disaster for the State of Alabama (FEMA-1842-DR), dated 06/19/2009.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Flooding, and Straight-line 
Winds.
    Incident Period: 05/06/2009 through 05/08/2009.

DATES: Effective Date: 06/19/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/18/2009.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 03/19/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 06/19/2009, applications 
for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other 
locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Autauga, 
Elmore, Montgomery.
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Alabama: Bullock, Chilton, Coosa, Crenshaw, Dallas, Lowndes, Macon, 
Pike, Tallapoosa.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
    Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere...............      4.875
    Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere............      2.437
    Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere...............      6.000
    Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit         4.500
     Available Elsewhere.....................................
    Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit         4.000
     Available Elsewhere.....................................
For Economic Injury:
    Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without           4.000
     Credit Available Elsewhere..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11789B and
  for economic injury is 117900.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-15105 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           13862
<SECURITIES>                                     24923
<RECEIVABLES>                                   168608
<ALLOWANCES>                                      4504
<INVENTORY>                                     138679
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                393076
<PP&E>                                          357581
<DEPRECIATION>                                  122095
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1014923
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           302904
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2148
<OTHER-SE>                                      629172
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1014923
<SALES>                                         862471
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                890806
<CGS>                                           279334
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   279334
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                590509
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               10146
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  10817
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2210
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               8607
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      8607
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.40
        

</TABLE>
July 16, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MARGARET ONWUDIEGWU, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00249-CV V.

JAIME J. DOMINGUEZ, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment signed February 24, 2014 in favor 

of appellee Jaime J. Dominguez, was heard on the transcript of the record. We

have inspected the record and find legally insufficient evidence to support the 

judgment. We therefore order the judgment of the court below REVERSED and 

RENDER judgment that Jaime J. Dominguez take nothing by his claims.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellee Jaime J. Dominguez.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

ANDRE GREEN,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 185 EAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
 Dated: September 8, 2009/s/ J. Melville EngleJ. Melville EngleChief Executive Officer & DirectorDated: September 8, 2009/s/ Matthew T. PlavanMatthew T. PlavanEVP, Chief Operating Officer &Chief Financial Officer
July 31, 2013


 


Infinity Augmented Reality, Inc.


45 Broadway


New York, New York 10006


 


Gentlemen:


 


This letter confirms that I, Adi Sheleg,
hereby resign my position as a Director, and all other positions to which I have been assigned, regardless of whether I served
in such capacity, of the Company, effective immediately. My resignation is not the result of any disagreement with the Company
on any matter relating to its operations, policies (including accounting or financial policies) or practices.


 


Sincerely,


 


	/s/ Adi Sheleg



	 
	Adi Sheleg	 
	 	 
	Dated: July 31, 2013
@article{1211036,
  author = {Matthew Carbone and Fanchen Meng and Christian Vorwerk and Benedikt Mauer and Fabian Peschel and Xiaohui Qu and Eli Stavitski and Claudia Draxl and John Vinson and Deyu Lu},
  title = {Lightshow: a Python package for writing computational x-ray absorption spectroscopy input files},
  year = {2023},
  number = {8},
  month = {2023-07-29 04:07:00},
  publisher = {Journal of Open Source Software},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=935421},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05182},
  language = {en},
}
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 23

                                      
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
                                      

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated January 14, 1998, except for Note
BB, as to which the date is March 16, 1998, included in the 1997 Annual Report
to Shareholders of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-11890) pertaining to the St. Paul Federal Bank For Savings
Profit Sharing and Savings Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33- 60609) pertaining to the St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. 1995 Incentive Plan and
the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-31195) pertaining to the St. Paul
Bancorp, Inc. Employee Incentive Plan of our report dated January 14, 1998, 
except for Note BB, as to which the date is March 16, 1998, with respect to 
the consolidated financial statements of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc.  incorporated 
by reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 
1997.



                                                               Ernst & Young LLP

March 27, 1998
Chicago, Illinois
@article{1206086,
  author = {A. Gilad Kusne and Austin McDannald},
  title = {Scalable Multi-Agent Lab Framework for Lab Optimization},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-04-11 04:04:00},
  publisher = {Matter},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=935256},
  language = {en},
}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: REAPPOINTMENT TO MINOR

COURT RULES COMMITTEE 

:

:

:

NO. 389

MAGISTERIAL DOCKET

 O R D E R

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 20th day of July, 2015, Magisterial District Judge Jerry G. 

Cartwright, Jr., Lawrence County, is hereby reappointed as a member of the Minor 

Court Rules Committee for a term of three years commencing September 6, 2015.
**Exhibit 10(v)**

 

AMENDMENT TO THE BANK OF NEW YORK COMPANY, INC. 

EXCESS CONTRIBUTION PLAN 

 

WHEREAS, The Bank of New York Company, Inc. Excess Contribution Plan (the “Excess Contribution Plan”) was amended and restated, effective as of July 10, 1990; and 

 

WHEREAS, Section 19 of the Excess Contribution Plan provides that the Board of Directors of The Bank of New York Company,Inc. may amend the Excess Contribution Plan at any time; except in certain respects not material hereto; and 

 

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company desires to amend the Excess Contribution Plan; 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Excess Contribution Plan is hereby amended, effective asof November 12, 2002, by amending the second sentence of Section 4 to read as follows: 

 

When a Participant’s benefit payments under the ESOP commence (or when his benefits under the ESOP are transferred to the RetirementPlan of The Bank of New York Company, Inc.), a Participant shall receive payment, in cash, of the excess, if any, of (i) the equivalent actuarial value of the Stock Units credited to the Participant’s Account, expressed as a life annuity, and(ii) the benefit to which the Participant is entitled to receive under Part I of The Bank of New York Company, Inc. Excess Benefit Plan. 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Bank of New York Company, Inc. has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officers this 22th day of January,2002. 

 

/s/    ThomasA. Renyi

        Thomas A. Renyi 

 

ATTEST: 

 

/s/    Patricia A. Bicket

        Patricia A. Bicket 

 

-1-
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Dreams, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending March 31, 2007, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ross Tannenbaum, Principal Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge, 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 fully presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|    |  |                            
|--- |  | ---------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Ross Tannenbaum        
|    |  | Ross Tannenbaum            
|    |  | Principal Executive Officer
|    |  | June 29, 2007
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

SAMUEL STEINBERG,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 169 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
Exhibit
        32
 Section
        1350 Certifications
 
 **STATEMENT
        FURNISHED PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 The
        undersigned is the Financial Officer of Imperiali Inc. This Certification
        is
        made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This
        Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Imperiali
        Inc for
        the quarter ended November 30, 2006.
 
 The
        undersigned certifies that such 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements
        of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
        the
        information contained in such 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Imperiali
        Inc as
        of November 30, 2006.
 
 This
            Certification is executed as of April 13,
            2007.
 /sCharles
        A. Fiscina
 CFO (Principal
        Executive and Financial Officer *)*
 
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        us, Inc. and will be retained by Imperiali Inc and furnished to the Securities
        and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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


(18 U.S.C SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of China Tel Group, Inc. and its Subsidiaries (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“Report”), I, George Alvarez, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C Section 1350), 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 Company.





Dated: April 15, 2010
By:
/s/ George AlvarezGeorge AlvarezChief Executive Officer








[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to China Tel Group, Inc. and will be retained by China Tel Group, Inc. and furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
#### In the Matter of Emanuel Hilaire, Appellant, v Board of Parole, Respondent.

[976 NYS2d 898]

Appeal from a judg*1264ment of the Supreme Court (McDonough, J.), entered March 15, 2013 in Greene County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a February 2012 decision of respondent denying his request for parole release. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and this appeal ensued. The Attorney General has advised this Court that petitioner reappeared before respondent in August 2013, at which time his request for parole release was again denied. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed as moot *(see Matter of Griffin v Evans,*105 AD3d 1221, 1222 [2013]; *Matter of Charlemagne v Evans,*104 AD3d 1012, 1012 [2013]). Contrary to petitioner’s claim, we find that the exception to the mootness doctrine is inapplicable here *(see Matter of Marcelin v Evans,*108 AD3d 979, 979 [2013], *lv denied*22 NY3d 855 [2013]; *Matter of Gilsinger v New York State Div. of Parole,*76 AD3d 1130, 1130 [2010]).

Peters, PJ., Lahtinen, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
#### Judith Rubin et al., Plaintiffs, v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Appellant, and Greyhound Lines, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendant.

[854 NYS2d 61]

It is alleged that the injured plaintiff tripped and fell in a hole where a stanchion had been, in an area where passengers would queue up to board Greyhound buses at the Port Authority Bus Terminal in Manhattan. There is an issue of fact, based on the circumstances presented including Greyhound’s use of the area, as to whether it created or contributed to the dangerous condition, and thus had a duty to warn or protect passengers *(see Kush v City of Buffalo,*59 NY2d 26, 29-30 [1983]), even if such area was not within the boundaries of its leasehold.

The indemnification clause in Greyhound’s lease, which it produced in discovery and relied on before the motion court, and which remained effective after expiration of the lease *(see City of New York v Pennsylvania R.R. Co.,*37 NY2d 298, 300-301 [1975]), is enforceable in light of Greyhound’s lease obligation to procure insurance, even if that clause does not limit recovery to the required coverage *(see Great N. Ins. Co. v Interior Constr. Corp.,*7 NY3d 412, 418-419 [2006]), and despite the fact that the amount of damages in this case had not been reduced to a sum certain within required policy limits.

There should have been a conditional grant of summary judgment on the indemnification claim *(see Lowe v Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.,*40 AD3d 264 [2007], *lv dismissed*9 NY3d 891*423[2007]; *Mangano v American Stock Exch.,*234 AD2d 198 [1996]). Our holding in *Iurato v City of New York*(18 AD3d 247 [2005], *lv dismissed*6 NY3d 806 [2006]), that an attempt to dismiss an indemnification claim prior to a finding of liability was premature, is not to the contrary. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000811205
<NAME>                        ENEX OIL & GAS INCOME PROGRAM III - SERIES 2, L.P.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   dec-31-1996
<CASH>                                         2129
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13590
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               19665
<PP&E>                                         1642894
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1276289
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 386270
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          344236
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     42034
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   386270
<SALES>                                        122230
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               122230
<CGS>                                          89038
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  112390
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               23352
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (761)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   9079
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>