alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### IN RE JOHNSON R. ET AL.

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 18638.

*David J. Reich,*in support of the petition.

*John E. Tucker,*assistant attorney general, in opposition.

Decided July 8, 2010

The petition by the respondent father for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 121 Conn. App. 464 (AC 31028), is granted, limited to the following issues:

> “1. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the record was inadequate to review the issue of whether the due process rights of an incompetent father were adequately protected in the termination of parental rights proceeding?

> “2. If the record is adequate for review, did the trial court sufficiently ensure that such rights were protected in the termination proceeding?”
EX-34.7
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800
Dallas TX 75201-2997
Telephone (214) 999 1400
Facsimile (214) 754 7991



Report of independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors of The First American Corporation:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Report on Assessment of Compliance, that First American Commercial Real Estate
Services, Inc. (the "Company" and an indirect subsidiary of The First American
Corporation) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of
the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for all loans for
commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as
the commercial tax service provider (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2007
and for the year then ended, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-(iii),
1122(d)(2)(i)-(iv), 112(d)(3)(i)-(iv),1122(d)(4)(i)-(x) and
1122(d)(4)(xiv)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the
servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management's
assertion identifies the individual securities defined by management as
constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of
selected securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing
activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company
processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in
compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited
to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company
during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to
detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or
subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts
calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report.
We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing
customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider is
fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 12, 2008
#### Columbus Bar Association *v.*Peden.

[Cite as *Columbus Bar Assn. v. Peden,*123 Ohio St.3d 1209, 2009-Ohio-5339.]

(No. 2008-0007

Submitted September 8, 2009

Decided September 15, 2009.)

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, John Joseph Peden, Attorney Registration No. 0021233, last known business address in Gahanna, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of June 15, 2009, wherein the court suspended respondent until he complied with its May 15, 2008 order and paid board costs and accrued interest in full. Respondent has paid board costs and interest in full and is in compliance with the court’s order of June 15, 2009. Therefore,

{¶ 3} It is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. Respondent shall continue to serve monitored probation as set forth in the order of May 15, 2008, until he demonstrates his compliance with all of the conditions set forth in that order, he applies for termination of probation, and the court orders his probation terminated.

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

{¶ 5} For earlier case, see *Columbus Bar Assn. v. Peden,*118 Ohio St.3d 244, 2008-Ohio-2237, 887 N.E.2d 1183.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Justin Lawless, Appellant.

[2 NYS3d 805]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Prager, J.), rendered March 6, 2014, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with *Anders v California*(386 US 738 [1967]), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

Ordered that the motion of Martin Goldberg for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant is granted, and he is directed to turn over all papers in his possession to new counsel assigned herein; and it is further,

Ordered that Richard M. Langone, Esq., 600 Old Country Road, Suite 328, Garden City, N.Y., 11530, is assigned as counsel to perfect the appeal; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is directed to furnish a copy of the certified transcripts of the proceedings to the new assigned counsel; and it is further,

Ordered that new counsel shall serve and file a brief on behalf of the appellant within 90 days of the date of this decision and order on motion, and the respondent shall serve and *812file its brief within 30 days after the brief on behalf of the appellant is served and filed. By prior decision and order on motion of this Court dated June 3, 2014, the appellant was granted leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, with the appeal to be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings) and on the briefs of the parties, who were directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other.

Upon this Court’s independent review of the record, we conclude that there are nonfrivolous issues in this case, including, but not necessarily limited to, whether the County Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motions to withdraw his plea of guilty *(see*CPL 220.60 [3]; *People v Milord,*102 AD3d 891 [2013]; *People v Graves,*92 AD3d 799 [2012]; *People v Mack,*90 AD3d 784 [2011]). Accordingly, assignment of new counsel is warranted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Stokes,*95 NY2d 633 [2001]; *see generally Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.],*89 AD3d 252, 254-261 [2011]).

Dillon, J.P., Chambers, Austin and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
The State



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

April 29, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00077

- CR

Gary VISE

,

Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Cou rt No. 2012CR9391 Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s brief was originally due March 28 , 2014; however, the court granted appellant an extension of time until April 28, 2014 to file the brief. Appellant has filed a motion requesting an additional extension of time.

We grant the motion and we order appellant’s attorney, Dayna L. Jones, to file the brief by May 27, 2014 (60 days after the original due date). Counsel is advised that no further extensions of time will be granted absent a motion that (1) demonstrates e xtraordinary circumstances justifying further delay, (2) advises the court of the efforts counsel has expended in preparing the brief, and (3) provides the court reasonable assurance that the brief will be completed and filed by the requested extended dead line. If the brief or a conforming motion is not filed by the date ordered, the court may abate this appeal and remand the case to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether appellant or his counsel has abandoned the appeal.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 29th day of April, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### Nicholas PAZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Terry O'BRIEN, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 10-7088.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 18, 2011.

Decided: Jan. 26, 2011.

Nicholas Paz, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Nicholas Paz, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2010) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Paz v. O’Brien,*No. 7:10-cv-00304-jlk-mfu, 2010 WL 2927430 (W.D.Va. July 23, 2010). 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.*
ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

June 7, 2024

CR-2022-1327

Chad Richardson v. State of Alabama (Appeal from Lawrence Circuit Court: CC-19-

104 ) 

NOTICE 

You are hereby notified that on June 7, 2024, the following action was taken 

in the above-referenced cause by the Court of Criminal Appeals:

Application for Rehearing Overruled.

D. Scott Mitchell, Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Yankee Holding Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 29, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Craig W. Rydin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ CRAIG W. RYDIN     
|Craig W. Rydin         
|Chief Executive Officer
|March 27, 2008
[No. 35085-8-II.

Division Two.

September 5, 2007.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Pablo Enrique Valdez, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 06-1-00856-1, John F. Nichols, J., entered July 5, *200Q. Affirmed in part, reversed in part,*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, C.J., concurred in by Bridgewater and Hunt, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         519,761
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      11,150,780
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  7,590,856
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       1,530,015
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         1,567,108
<LOANS>                                    105,694,014
<ALLOWANCE>                                    358,867
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             130,892,480
<DEPOSITS>                                 107,934,224
<SHORT-TERM>                                 6,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,242,533
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,317,502
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,398,221
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             130,892,480
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              9,013,141
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              537,001
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               599,031
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            10,149,173
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           5,256,981
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,691,700
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        4,457,473
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   33,500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,663,408
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,001,502
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   2,001,502
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,258,443
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.50
<LOANS-NON>                                    290,500
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               325,367
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              358,867
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           358,867
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEETS AT DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND THE STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF ITS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR
THE PERIOD DECEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       5,508,568
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,835,397
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,343,965
<PP&E>                                     123,720,710
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,265,647
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             120,636,573
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          664,650
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 119,971,923
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               120,636,573
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,160,889
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,694,463
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,262,658
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 13628]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5322]



[[Page 13628]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

February 27, 2001.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted 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 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before April 5, 2001 
to be assured of consideration.

U.S. Customs Service (CUS)

    OMB Number: 1515-0213.
    Form Number: None.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Drawback Process Regulations and Entry Collection Documents.
    Description: The information is to be used by Customs Officers to 
expedite the filing and processing of drawback claims, while 
maintaining necessary enforcement information to maintain effective 
administrative oversight over the drawback program.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 8,150.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent: 8 hours.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 90,000 hours.

    OMB Number: 1515-0219.
    Form Number: None.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Andean Trade Preferences.
    Description: The collection identifies the country of origin and 
related rules which apply for purposes of duty-free or reduced-duty 
treatment on imported goods under the Act and specifies the documentary 
and other procedural requirements which apply to any claim for such 
preferential tariff treatment under the Act (Public Law 102-182, which 
is codified at 19 U.S.C. 3201 through 3206.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, Individuals or 
households, Not-for-profit institutions.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 150,000.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent: 2 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 5,000 hours.
    Clearance Officer: J. Edgar Nichols (202) 927-1426 or Tracey 
Denning (202) 927-1429, U.S. Customs Service, Information Services 
Branch, Ronald Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 
3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.

Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-5322 Filed 3-5-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
Exhibit 23.1  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8
No. 333-153231) pertaining to the GT Solar International, Inc. 2008
Equity Incentive Plan and the Second Amended and Restated GT Solar
International, Inc. 2006 Stock Option Plan of GT Solar International, Inc.
of our report dated June 3, 2009, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of GT Solar International, Inc. included in this
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 28, 2009.   /s/
  Ernst & Young LLP  Boston,
Massachusetts June 3,
2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          27,544
<SECURITIES>                                     6,663
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,842
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (137)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,634
<PP&E>                                           6,756
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,932)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  39,636
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,537
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            69
<OTHER-SE>                                      37,030
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    39,636
<SALES>                                          4,100
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,100
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,619
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    730
<INCOME-TAX>                                       306
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                424
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       424
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        



</TABLE>
#### ESSEX ELECTRO ENGINEERS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and Aviation Ground Equipment Corp., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 2011-5016.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 3, 2011.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Essex Electro Engineers, Inc. moves for leave for the United States Court of Federal Claims to “correct the docket” of that court to include certain exhibits Essex argues were inadvertently omitted. The United States does not oppose Essex’s effort to seek this court’s leave, but argues it is for the Court of Federal Claims to determine whether any documents were inadvertently omitted from its docket.

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

The United States Court of Federal Claims is granted leave to consider, within its discretion, Essex Electro Engineers, Inc.’s motion to correct the docket.