alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### David M. Reynolds, Respondent-Appellant, v State of New York, Appellant-Respondent.

(Claim No. 106738.)

[988 NYS2d 822]

Appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Nicholas *V.*Midey, Jr., J.), entered November 5, 2012. The judgment awarded claimant money damages after a nonjury trial.

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

Memorandum: Claimant commenced this action seeking damages arising from injuries he allegedly sustained when New York State Troopers used excessive force against him during a traffic stop. The Court of Claims bifurcated the trial and found in favor of claimant on the issue of liability, i.e., that the use of force constituted an assault and battery against claimant. Defendant now appeals and claimant cross-appeals from a judgment awarding claimant money damages after the trial on damages.

Contrary to claimant’s contention, the court’s determination that the assault was not a proximate cause of claimant’s lumbar spine injuries is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence *(see Treat v Wegmans Food Mkts., Inc.,*46 AD3d 1403, 1404-1405 [2007]). The court determined that claimant suffered a closed head injury and herniated discs in his cervical spine as a result of the assault, and awarded claimant $225,000 for past pain and suffering and $475,000 for future pain and suffering. Contrary to the contentions of claimant and defendant, the award for past and future pain and suffering does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation *(see*CPLR 5501 [c]; *Ellis v Emerson,*57 AD3d 1435, 1437 [2008]).

Claimant further contends that the award of $300,000 for future medical expenses should be increased to cover treatment for his lumbar spine injuries, closed head injury and resulting symptoms, and emotional issues. Inasmuch as the court did not *1497err in concluding that the lumbar spine injuries were not a proximate result of the assault, we conclude that the court did not err in failing to award future medical expenses for those injuries. With respect to the closed head injury and emotional issues, we conclude that claimant failed to establish with the requisite reasonable certainty that he would require future medical expenses to treat those injuries *(see Huff v Rodriguez,*45 AD3d 1430, 1433 [2007]; *Faas v State of New York,*249 AD2d 731, 732 [1998]).

Present — Smith, J.E, Centra, Carni, Whalen and DeJoseph, JJ.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 3, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131635 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131635 

 COA: 269892 

Kent CC: 05-004985-FH 

JOHN FITZGERALD STEVENS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion by defendant-appellant for dismissal of his 

application for leave to appeal is considered, and the application for leave to appeal is 

DISMISSED with prejudice. 

p1031 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 3, 2006 

Clerk
<PAGE>   1

TRIDENT MICROSYSTEMS, INC.


                                  EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 33-57610, No. 33-59050, No. 33-78094, No. 33-89828,
No. 333-09383, and No. 333-29667) of Trident Microsystems, Inc. of our report
dated July 24, 2001 relating to the financial statements which appear in page 30
of this Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Jose, California
September 28, 2001
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 13.1



                  Report of Ernst & Young, Independent Auditors

Stockholders and Board of Directors
Intergroup Healthcare Corporation



We have audited the consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders'
equity, and cash flows of Intergroup Healthcare Corporation for the year ended
December 31, 1993.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.
We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated results of operations and
cash flows of Intergroup Healthcare Corporation for the year ended December 31,
1993 in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

ERNST & YOUNG  LLP

Tucson, Arizona
February 16, 1994, except
Note 17 as to which the date is
March 18, 1994




                                      49
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
<CIK>                              0000863837  
<NAME>                             GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LTD PARTNERSHIP III-C
                                    
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                540,911
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                         497,737
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    1,038,648
<PP&E>                             19,627,883
<DEPRECIATION>                     16,185,252
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      4,567,928
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  83,542
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                          4,341,558
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        4,567,928
<SALES>                             3,071,851
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    3,255,587
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       3,365,178
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      (109,591)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  (109,591)
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                         (109,591)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           (0.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               0
        
 

</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.254

 

LICENSE

 

	
NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE   STATE REGULATION OF
   COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATIZATION
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Type of activities in the sphere of   telecommunications and territory:
    	
 
    	
Provision of services of mobile telephone   communications with the right of maintenance and operation of   telecommunication networks and provision for use of telecommunication   channels in the entire territory of Ukraine in accordance with the License   Terms.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Business entity
    	
 
    	
VF UKRAINE Private Joint Stock Company
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Identification code of the legal entity in   accordance with the Unified State Register of Enterprises and Organizations   of Ukraine:
    	
 
    	
14333937
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Location of the legal entity:
    	
 
    	
01601 Leipzigskaya St., 15 Kyiv, Ukraine
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Date and number of resolution on license reissue:
    	
 
    	
June 27, 2017 No. 325
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Validity term of the License:
    	
 
    	
until September 27, 2026
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
License registration number:
    	
 
    	
000815
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
License terms:
    	
 
    	
For provision of services of mobile telephone   communications with the right of maintenance and operation of   telecommunication networks and provision for use of telecommunication   channels approved by the resolution of the National Commission of Ukraine for   regulation of communications dated January 26, 2006 No. 179 and   registered in the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on February 17, 2006   under No. 145/12019.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Special terms:
    	
 
    	
Permits to provide mobile telephone communication   services using digital cellular radio communications of CDMA-450 standard   with the right of maintenance and operation of telecommunication networks and   provision for use of telecommunication channels using radio frequencies   specified in license No. 6060 dated July 12, 2010.
   Amendments to special terms by means of their exclusion shall be effective   since September 28, 2021.
    


 

	
Chairman
    	
/signature/ A. Zhivotovskiy
    


 

	
Date of license issue:
    	
July 10, 2017
    


 

Seal:

Ukraine

Kyiv

NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE STATE REGULATION OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATIZATION NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE STATE REGULATION OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATIZATION

ID code 37994258
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6010
JOHN C. ROBINSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RICHARD P. STROKER, Acting Director of State Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-97-1802-0-19BD) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: May 1, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John C. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Carl Norman Lundberg, SOUTHCAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION, PAROLE & PARDON SERVICES, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Robinson v. Stroker , No. CA-97-1802-0-19BD (D.S.C. Dec. 16, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM TEAM AMERICA
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF DECEMBER
31, 1999 AND 1998 TOGETHER WITH AUDITOR'S REPORT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         3087051
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4612961
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (200000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              19692238
<PP&E>                                         3133311
<DEPRECIATION>                               (1488486)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                47886375
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         19971842
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                      28754931
<OTHER-SE>                                   (1482901)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  47886375
<SALES>                                      401940429
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             401940429
<CGS>                                        386217936
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 15567030
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                400000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                150000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              113730
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (543651)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    214375
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (758026)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (758026)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.17)


</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7482** 

ROBERT FROST, JR. , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; DIRECTOR BILL BYARS, South Carolina Department of Corrections; LEVERN COHEN, Warden Ridgeland Correctional Institution; MS. MONTOUTH, Inmate Grievance Coordinator, Ridgeland Correctional Institution; CAPTAIN BEST, in their individual and official capacity , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States Distric t Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg

. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. , District Judge. ( 5:11

- cv - 02520

- JFA

- KDW )

Submitted : December 20, 2012 Decided: December 27, 2012

Before KING and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Robert Frost, Jr. , Appellant Pro Se. Matthew David Cavender , Marshall Hodges Waldron, Jr., GRIFFITH, SADLER & SHARP, P.A. , Beaufort, South Carolina, for Appellees

. Unpublished opinions ar e not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Robert Frost, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge ’ s recommendation and denying without prejudice the Defendants ’ motion for summary judgment in Frost ’ s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (200 6 ), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (200 6 ); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Cor p. , 337 U.S. 541 , 545

- 46 (1949). The order Frost seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY

#### Claudia R. Stout v. William Charles Stout

January 30, 1985

Case No. (Chancery) 34789

By JUDGE THOMAS R. MONROE

On October 26, 1984, this Court took under advisement Complainant’s motion for the entry of an order of sanction striking any and all affirmative defenses or Cross-Bills of the Defendant/Cross-Complainant for his failure to answer proper questions regarding his adulterous conduct.

The general rule is that a party, here the Cross-Complainant, in a civil case, may invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege. However a Motion to Dismiss the Cross-Complaint will lie where the Cross-Complainant invokes the privilege against self-incrimination in order to refuse to answer questions pertinent to the issue. There have been no cases reported from the Supreme Court of Virginia on this issue; however this Court has looked to decisions from other states more notably, *Stockham*v. *Stockham,*168 So.2d 320 (1964); *City of Petersburg*v. Houghton, 362 So.2d 681 (1978). This is a Court of equity and, accordingly, if the Cross-Complainant continues to refuse to answer said questions he will be barred from seeking any affirmative relief.
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 11
                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                     AS OF QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                          SEPTEMBER 30, 1998  SEPTEMBER 30, 1997
                                          ------------------  ------------------
<S>                                       <C>                 <C>
Net income/(Loss)                              $  318,054          $  329,419
Weighted average shares outstanding             2,203,562           2,185,348
Earning/(Loss) per shares outstanding          $     0.09          $     0.15

</TABLE>

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              FOR THE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED
                                          SEPTEMBER 30, 1998  SEPTEMBER 30, 1997
                                          ------------------  ------------------
<S>                                       <C>                 <C>  
Net income/(Loss)                              $  511,263          $  639,543
Weighted average shares outstanding             2,201,306           2,183,092
Earning/(Loss) per shares outstanding          $     0.23          $     0.29 

</TABLE>



                                      19
<PAGE>
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


In connection with the TEAM America, Inc. (the "Company"), Annual Report on Form
10-K for the period ended December 28, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, S. Cash Nickerson,
Chief 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,
that, to my knowledge:

         (1).     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
                  amended; and

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


Date:             March 28, 2003           By:   /s/  S. Cash Nickerson
         -------------------------------      -------------------------------
                                                      S. Cash Nickerson
                                                      Chief Executive Officer


The signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Team America, Inc. and will be retained by Team America and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

# AGENCY:

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

# ACTION:

Notice.

                    Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3511(d), the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), as amended, and the FASAB Rules Of Procedure, as amended in October 2010, notice is hereby given that the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has issued an exposure draft of a proposed Technical Bulletin entitled                     *Assigning Assets to Component Reporting Entities.*

                    The exposure draft is available on the FASAB Web site at                     *http://www.fasab.gov/​documents-for-comment/​.*                     Copies can be obtained by contacting FASAB at (202) 512-7350.                

                    Respondents are encouraged to comment on any part of the exposure draft. Written comments are requested by October 13, 2017, and should be sent to                     *fasab@fasab.gov*                     or Wendy M. Payne, Executive Director, Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, 441 G Street NW., Suite 6814, Mailstop 6H19, Washington, DC 20548.                

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Wendy M. Payne, Executive Director, 441 G Street NW., Mailstop 6H19, Washington, DC 20548, or call (202) 512-7350.

Authority:Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463.

Dated: September 12, 2017.

Wendy M. Payne,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 2017-19844 Filed 9-18-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 1610-02-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          68,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,854,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   181,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,142,000
<PP&E>                                       6,439,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,145,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,926,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,635,000
<BONDS>                                        200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,456,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,926,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            42,919,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               23,266,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            18,607,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                28,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                996,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   415,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            581,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   581,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.29


</TABLE>