alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 2:10-cr-00851-CCC Document 205 Filed 06/04/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID: 2090
Case 2:10-cr-00851-CCC Document 205 Filed 06/04/12 Page 2 of 5 PageID: 2091
Case 2:10-cr-00851-CCC Document 205 Filed 06/04/12 Page 3 of 5 PageID: 2092
Case 2:10-cr-00851-CCC Document 205 Filed 06/04/12 Page 4 of 5 PageID: 2093
Case 2:10-cr-00851-CCC Document 205 Filed 06/04/12 Page 5 of 5 PageID: 2094
#### In the Matter of Kenneth Alfano et al., Respondents, v Tanya Schulthis-Devoe, Appellant. Michael S. Bromberg, Nonparty Appellant. (And a Related Proceeding.)

[854 NYS2d 159]

Shortly after the birth of the subject child, the Family Court, upon an emergency removal petition and with the mother’s consent, placed the child in the temporary custody of the respondents. The neglect petition was established upon the mother’s admission. Thereafter, the Family Court approved a permanency goal of a “planned permanent living arrangement that includes a significant connection to an adult who is willing to be a permanency resource for the child” (Family Ct Act § 1089 [c] [1] [v]). The respondents sought custody pursuant to this arrangement and, after a hearing, the Family Court, inter alia, granted their petition.

*636Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the respondents had standing to petition for custody based upon their lawful temporary custody of the child and the Family Court’s authority, in furtherance of the approved permanency goal, to grant them custody as “suitable persons” pursuant to Family Court Act § 1017 (2) (a) (i). The determination that the best interests of the child were served by allowing him to remain in the custody of the respondents has a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed *(see Matter of Battista v Fasano,*41 AD3d 712 [2007]; *Matter of James v Hickey,*6 AD3d 536, 537 [2004]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.2    
  


AMENDMENT  


    THIS AMENDMENT ("Amendment") dated the 13th day of December, 2001, amends the Transportation Agreement dated as of January 10, 2001 (the "Agreement")
between The United States Postal Service ("USPS") and Federal Express Corporation ("FedEx"). 


Preamble  


    WHEREAS, USPS and FedEx entered into the Agreement in order to provide for the FedEx Services (as such term is defined in the Agreement"), 


    WHEREAS,
the parties now desire to amend certain provisions of the Agreement as more specifically set forth in this Agreement. 


    NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in this Amendment, the parties agree as follows: 


    1.
Attachments 1 and 2 (Revision 9 of each) to Exhibit A are hereby deleted in their entirety and Attachments 1 and 2 (Revision 10 of each) to this Amendment are substituted in
lieu thereof. 


    2.
All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 


    3.
Except as amended by this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and are ratified and confirmed in all respects. 



    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Amendment in duplicate, one for each of the Parties, as of December 13, 2001. 



	

 	
 	

THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

/s/ J. DWIGHT YOUNG   
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	Title:	 	Manager,

National Mail Transportation Purchasing
	

 	
 	

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

/s/ PAUL J. HERRON   
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	Title:	 	Vice President,

Postal Transportation Management








Attachment 1—Day Product 


[*]







Attachment 2—Night Product 


[*] 


	*
	BLANK
SPACES CONTAINED CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHICH HAS BEEN FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO RULE 24b-2 UNDER THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED. 









QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.2
#### In the Matter of Clarence Michael W., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Samarra Leatrice J., Appellant; Saint Dominic’s Home et al., Respondents.

[822 NYS2d 531]

*486Resettled order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about March 30, 2004, which, after a fact-finding determination, terminated respondent mother’s parental rights and committed custody and guardianship of the child to petitioners for the purpose of adoption placement, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There was clear and convincing evidence that despite petitioner agency’s diligent efforts, respondent permanently neglected her child by failing to maintain contact or plan for his future (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]). Although the agency had devised a plan to reunite respondent and the child, and referred her to drug rehabilitation programs, she never completed the treatment program, thus failing to address the problems that led to the child’s placement in the first place *(see Matter of Paul H.,*208 AD2d 402 [1994]).

In view of respondent’s failure and the fact that the child has bonded with his foster mother, there was a preponderance of evidence that termination of respondent’s parental rights was in the child’s best interests *(Matter of Star Leslie W.,*63 NY2d 136, 147-148 [1984]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Gonzalez, Catterson and Malone, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 86 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 86

   Providing amounts for the expenses of the Select Committee on the 
    Climate Crisis and the Select Committee on the Modernization of 
                               Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2019

 Ms. Lofgren submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                 the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Providing amounts for the expenses of the Select Committee on the 
    Climate Crisis and the Select Committee on the Modernization of 
                               Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR EXPENSES OF SELECT COMMITTEES.

    (a) Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.--
            (1) Payment of expenses.--There shall be paid out of the 
        applicable accounts of the House of Representatives not more 
        than $70,000 for the expenses of the Select Committee on the 
        Climate Crisis established under section 104(f) of House 
        Resolution 6, as agreed to January 9, 2019, to be available 
        during the period beginning at noon on January 1, 2019, and 
        ending on March 31, 2019.
            (2) Vouchers.--Payments under this subsection shall be made 
        on vouchers authorized by the Select Committee on the Climate 
        Crisis, signed by the chair of the Select Committee, and 
        approved in the manner directed by the Committee on House 
        Administration.
    (b) Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress.--
            (1) Payment of expenses.--There shall be paid out of the 
        applicable accounts of the House of Representatives not more 
        than $50,000 for the expenses of the Select Committee on the 
        Modernization of Congress established under title II of House 
        Resolution 6, as agreed to January 9, 2019, to be available 
        during the period beginning at noon on January 1, 2019, and 
        ending on March 31, 2019.
            (2) Vouchers.--Payments under this subsection shall be made 
        on vouchers authorized by the Select Committee on the 
        Modernization of Congress, signed by the chair of the Select 
        Committee, and approved in the manner directed by the Committee 
        on House Administration.
    (c) Regulations.--Amounts made available under this resolution 
shall be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the 
Committee on House Administration.
                                 <all>
```
36 Occupational Outlook Quarterly • Fall 2009

Some occupations pay well but employ relatively few 

workers. Others don’t pay as well, but their employment 

numbers are larger. And some occupations have both 

large employment and high wages. 

High-paying, high-employment occupations are a 

diverse group, according to May 2008 data from the 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The chart shows 

the occupations with the highest employment levels in 

which median wages were above $32,390—the median 

annual wage for all occupations. 

Because employment numbers in these occupations 

are so large, many of the job openings projected over 

the 2006–16 decade will result from the need to replace 

workers who leave the occupation because of retirement 

or other reasons. But opportunities are also expected 

to arise from employment growth. Employment of 

Large occupations with 

higher-than-median wages

First-line supervisors/managers of retail sales workers

Maintenance and repair workers, general

First-line supervisors/managers of office

and administrative support workers

Executive secretaries and administrative assistants

Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing,

except technical and scientific products

Elementary school teachers, except special education

Truck drivers, heavy and tractor-trailer

General and operations managers

Bookkeeping, accounting, and auditing clerks

Registered nurses $62,450

45,790

40,030

51,330

49,330

37,270

91,570

32,510

35,310

33,710

Median annual 

wages, May 2008

1,186

1,404

1,305

1,492

1,494

1,544

1,673

1,698

1,855

2,543

Occupations with the highest employment levels in which median wages were above $32,390, May 2008

(Thousands of jobs)

registered nurses, for example, is expected to grow by 

23 percent over the projections decade. 

Education, training, and work experience vary for 

these workers, too. Elementary school teachers, for 

example, usually need at least a bachelor’s degree. 

In contrast, the most significant source of education or 

training for general maintenance and repair workers is 

experience in a related occupation. 

Employment and wage data in the chart come from 

the BLS Occupational Employment Statistics program; 

to learn more, visit www.bls.gov/oes or call (202) 

691–6569. For information about occupational projections or training, visit the BLS Employment Projections 

Web site, www.bls.gov/emp, or call (202) 691–5700. Or 

write to either program at 2 Massachusetts Avenue NE., 

Suite 2135, Washington, D.C. 20212.
Filed 2/20/02 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2002 ND 19

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Douglas Eric Guy, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20010136

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Cynthia A. Rothe-Seeger, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Birch P. Burdick, State’s Attorney, Courthouse, P.O. Box 2806, Fargo, N.D. 58108-2806, for plaintiff and appellee.

Richard E. Edinger, P.O. Box 1295, Fargo, N.D. 58107-1295, for defendant and appellant.

State v. Guy

No. 20010136

Per Curiam.

[¶1]We grant the State’s motion at oral argument to withdraw the material in its appendix, which appeared in violation of N.D.R.App.P. 30(a).

[¶2]We summarily affirm the East Central Judicial District Court’s judgment of conviction of Douglas Eric Guy for gross sexual imposition, burglary, robbery, and felonious restraint, under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7).  See, e.g., State v. Lewis, 291 N.W.2d 735, 737 (N.D. 1980) (declining to adopt the procedures outlined in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)).

[¶3]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Dale V. Sandstrom

William A. Neumann

Mary Muehlen Maring

Carol Ronning Kapsner
# table159_q16.2_size
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION  I, Raymond Talarico, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Success Exploration & Resources, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statements 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 small business issuers other certifying officers 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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.   Dated: January 21, 2014 By:  /s/ Raymond Talarico  Raymond Talarico, interim Chief Financial Officer and Director (Principal Financial Officer)   1
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO SECURITIES
ACT RULES 13A-14 AND 15D-14 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of the Partnership;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
periods 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 officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and
15d-14) 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;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; andc)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
 a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: March 17, 2006
    
    /s/ Robert J. Terrano

Robert J. TerranoExecutive Vice President,Chief Financial Officer
(March 13, 2008)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Roger Reid, Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 763]

The People met their burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, risk factors bearing a sufficient total point score to support a level three sex offender adjudication. Defendant’s arguments concerning the risk factors of accep*339tance of responsibility and release without supervision are unavailing *(see People v Lewis,*37 AD3d 689, 690 [2007], *Iv denied*8 NY3d 814 [2007]), and his arguments concerning a third risk factor are improperly raised for the first time on appeal (CPLR 4017, 5501 [a] [3]; Correction Law § 168-n [3] [SORA appeals governed by applicable CPLR provisions]; *People v Cassano,*34 AD3d 239 [2006], *Iv denied*8 NY3d 804 [2007]).

Defendant did not establish any special circumstances warranting a downward departure from his risk level *(see People v Guaman,*8 AD3d 545 [2004]). Defendant’s extensive record of similar acts of sexual abuse demonstrated a high risk of recidivism.

The court did not deny defendant due process of law by holding the hearing in his absence. The record establishes that he was sufficiently notified of the date of his hearing and forfeited his right to be present by not appearing *(see People v Porter,*37 AD3d 797 [2007]; *People v Jackson,*176 Misc 2d 476 [1998], *People v Brasier,*169 Misc 2d 337 [1996]). Concur—Lippman, P.J., Andrias, Williams and McGuire, JJ.
#### Phenix Ins. Co. *v.*Chadbourne, Adm’r, and others.

*(Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.*

1887.)

Ship-Owners—Liability for Agent’s Advances—Payment—Insurance.

The agents of the owners of a vessel advanced, at the owners’ request and for their benefit, the money necessary to enable the vessel to make a voyage,, and took out a policy of insurance to secure the amount advanced. The vessel was lost, and the insurance money collected by the agents. *Meld,*that the receipt of the money extinguished and satisfied the debt, and that neither under an assignment to the insurance company, nor under the doctrine of subrogation, could the company maintain an action against the owners to recover the amount from them.

The facts in this case were that the vessel was in Georgia, and it became necessary to raise money to put the vessel in condition to make a voyage to South America. Parsons & Loud, of New York, were agents of the owners, and advanced the money, taking out a policy of insurance to secure the amount thus advanced. The vessel ivas lost, and the insurance money collected by Parsons *&*Loud, and the plaintiff took an assignment of the claim. The defendant Chadbourne is administrator of the estate of Neliemiah Gibson. •

<7. *T. Russell, Jr.,*for libelant.

*F. Dodge,*for respondents.

Nelson, J.

It is perfectly clear, from the facts agreed upon in this case, that the insurance on the advances made by Parsons & Loud on the *301credit of the vessel and freight were effected at the defendants ’ request, at their cost, and for their benefit, and that Parsons & Loud were bound by their contract with the defendants to apply the insurance money, when received, to the payment of the debt incurred on account of the advances. The receipt of the insurance money by Parsons *&*Loud, therefore, operated at once as an extinguishment of the debt, and they could thereafter have maintained no action against the defendants for its recovery. The debt having been thus satisfied, nothing, of course, passed by the formal assignment of the claim by Parsons & Loud to the libelant. For the same reason, by paying the loss "the libelant acquired no right by way of subrogation to enforce the debt against the defendants. It could not, by paying the loss, get by subrogation a right which the assured did not possess, and it makes no difference that it had no notice of the arrangement between Parsons & Loud and *the defendants when*it issued the policy. All this has become settled law in this court by the reeout decision of the supreme court in *Phœnix Ins. Co.*v. *Erie & Western Transp. Co.,*117 U. S. 312, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 750, 1176.

Libel dismissed, with costs.
Case 1:10-cv-06387-RBK-JS Document 12 Filed 03/20/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 223
Exhibit 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We have issued our report dated March 6, 2006, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements and schedule and management's assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the
Annual Report of BNP Residential Properties, Inc.; our report dated March 6,
2006 on the Statement of Revenues and Certain Operating Expenses for Hampton
Apartments; and our report dated March 6, 2006 on the Statement of Revenues and
Certain Operating Expenses for Timber Apartments on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said
reports in the Registration Statements of BNP Residential Properties, Inc. on
Form S-3 (Nos. 333-07415, 333-68935, 333-79995, 333-84819, 333-86805, 333-92815,
333-106090, 333-112549, 333-113384 and 333-125184), Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-119623 and 333-126426).

  /s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Charlotte, North Carolina
March 6, 2006



                                      179
<PAGE>