FINDINGS OF FACT Clause Samples
The "Findings of Fact" clause serves to formally establish the factual background or circumstances that are accepted as true for the purposes of the agreement or legal proceeding. This clause typically lists specific events, dates, or conditions that both parties acknowledge, such as the existence of a contract, the occurrence of certain actions, or the status of relevant parties. By clearly stating these agreed-upon facts, the clause helps to prevent future disputes over the basic context of the agreement and provides a foundation for interpreting the rights and obligations of the parties.
POPULAR SAMPLE Copied 1 times
FINDINGS OF FACT. The Commission has considered the application, the supporting documentation, and Staff's recommendation. Based upon that review, the Commission finds that the Agreement meets the requirements of the Act in that it does not discriminate against a nonparty carrier and implementation of the Agreement is not inconsistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. The Commission finds that approval of the Agreement shall be conditioned upon the parties submitting any amendments to the Commission for approval pursuant to the procedure set out below.
FINDINGS OF FACT. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference as Findings of Fact.
FINDINGS OF FACT. The Arizona State Board of Respiratory Care Examiners is the duly constituted 18 agency for licensing and regulating of the practice of respiratory care in the State of Arizona and
FINDINGS OF FACT. 14 1. Respondent is the holder of License No. LCSW-13354 for the practice of Social 15 Work in the State of Arizona.
16 2. From 04/20 – 03/21, Respondent provided behavioral health services to Client at 17 Private Practice.
18 3. According to the progress notes, Client’s therapy focused on conversations 19 regarding Client and their partner’s (“Partner”) relationship.
20 4. It was unclear what the goals of therapy were since Respondent failed to devise 21 a treatment plan over the course of 11 months of treatment with Client.
22 5. At some point throughout the course of Client’s treatment, Client offered the idea 23 of Respondent hiring Partner to help Respondent promote her social media.
24 6. Respondent subsequently agreed and facilitated a consultation with Partner via 25 Zoom.
1 7. Despite Partner never officially promoting Respondent’s social media, 2 Respondent did pay Partner $35 for this consultation and gave Client the money to give to 3 Partner.
4 8. Respondent failed to establish and maintain professional therapeutic boundaries 5 with Client.
6 9. Respondent only knew of Partner through Client who was Respondent’s active 7 therapy client while Respondent engaged in this inappropriate consultation for social media 8 promotion services, creating a possible conflict of interest by engaging in multiple roles with a 9 client and their significant other.
10 10. A majority of Client’s therapy session involved conversations about Client and 11 Partner’s relationship, yet Respondent engaged in this non-therapeutic arrangement with 12 Partner.
13 11. Despite Respondent representing that having Partner promote her social media 14 was Client’s idea, Respondent blurred her professional boundaries by accepting Client’s offer 15 and having a consultation with Partner about the service Partner could offer Respondent as well 16 as providing payment to Partner.
17 12. Respondent failed to document anywhere in Client’s clinical record the 18 conversation between Respondent and Client where Client offers Partner’s services, as well as 19 the consultation between Respondent and Partner.
20 13. Respondent again blurred her professional boundaries with Client by texting 21 Client when Respondent saw Client in line at a drive through, saying she liked Client’s hair.
22 14. Respondent represented that accepting Client’s offer for Partner’s services and 23 Respondent texting Client outside of therapy was simply a lapse in judgment. 24 … 25 …
1 15. Respondent has been ind...
FINDINGS OF FACT. (a) The County Council of the County (the “County Council”), the governing body of the County, has previously enacted Ordinance No. 2594 of 1994, as amended by Ordinance No. 2842 of 1996, as amended by Ordinance No. 4276 of 2009, as amended by Ordinance No. of 2012 (collectively, the “County Ordinance”) and the City Council of the City (the “City Council”), the governing body of the City, has previously enacted Ordinance Number 94-27 of 1994, as amended by Ordinance No. 96-63 of 1996, as amended by Ordinance No. 2009-33 of 2009, as amended by Ordinance No. 2012- of 2012 (collectively, the “City Ordinance”), each of which provides for the establishment, collection and distribution of an accommodations fee of 2.3% of gross receipts (collectively, the “Accommodations Fee”) of businesses engaged in providing accommodations for transients within the boundaries of the County (exclusive of incorporated municipalities) and within the boundaries of the City, respectively, and other matters related thereto.
(b) Pursuant to the City Ordinance and the County Ordinance, the City Council and the County Council have respectively provided that the Accommodations Fees shall be used (i) first to pay debt service on obligations issued from time to time by the District pursuant to a bond resolution (the “Bond Resolution”), as such Bond Resolution may be supplemented, amended or restated (or replaced by a new bond resolution in connection with the issuance of obligations) and (ii) secondly as further provided in this Agreement.
(c) The County Council and the City Council have determined that it is necessary and advantageous that the County and the City agree with the District and the Escrow Agent that the Accommodations Fees shall be made available to pay a portion of the cost of financing and refinancing the District’s sports and entertainment arena (the “Arena”) on behalf of the District without the need for annual appropriations.
(d) The District, the County, the City and an escrow agent have previously entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (the “2009 Intergovernmental Agreement”) dated as of July 1, 2009 concerning the payment of the Accommodations Fees to the escrow agent for the purpose of making installment payments on the District’s $14,985,000 Greenville Arena District Public Facilities Corporation, Refunding Certificate of Participation, Series 2009B (the “Series 2009B Certificate”). The parties to the 2009 Intergovernmental Agreement now desire to terminate th...
FINDINGS OF FACT. 14 1. Respondent is the holder of License No. LMSW-16554 for the practice of social 15 work in the state of Arizona.
16 2. On 10/28/22, Respondent was arrested for driving under the influence.
17 3. Respondent’s blood alcohol content was measured at .055 %.
18 4. Respondent acknowledges consuming alcoholic beverages.
FINDINGS OF FACT. 14 1. Respondent is the holder of License No. LMSW-18502 for the practice of social 15 work in Arizona.
16 2. Since 03/01/20, Respondent has been licensed as an LMSW.
17 3. During her investigative interview, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ represented she worked at 18 various clinics and group homes since obtaining her license.
19 4. This included at least six facilities, including two agencies (“Agency 1” and 20 “Agency 2”).
21 5. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ represented the following in her written response:
22 a. Contrary to the claim, she received supervision from a clinical supervisor 23 (“Supervisor”) while working for Agency 1.
24 6. Respondent subsequently provided a 03/21 Outside Supervisor contract and 25 clinical supervision notes ranging from 03/21 – 10/21.
1 7. Clinical supervision notes included the following:
2 a. A 03/04/21 note where supervisees share information about their agency, the 3 population, experience, and they processed a client.
4 b. A 04/12/21 individual supervision session note noting Respondent came 5 prepared and presented several cases with needed details.
6 c. A 10/21/21 individual supervision session note indicating they discussed 7 cases in depth and therapeutic approaches for them.
8 8. Agency 1 is owned by Respondent’s husband (“Husband”) and business partner 9 (“Business Partner”).
10 9. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ represented the following during her investigative interview:
11 a. Respondent worked with Agency 1 for a few months, but does not recall the 12 dates.
13 b. Her role was like that of a supervisor, in that she handled scheduling, day to 14 day operations, and helped clients get what they needed.
15 c. Respondent did not really have any clients, but received clinical supervision.
16 d. She worked as a support for other therapists and completed intake 17 assessments and treatment plans.
18 e. Respondent sent the clinical supervision notes as proof she was supervised 19 because it was alleged she did not have supervision.
20 10. Despite Respondent representing she did not have a case load of clients, she 21 was involved in the client’s clinical care.
22 11. Respondent initially represented she received clinical supervision at Agency 1, 23 supplying clinical supervision notes appearing to correspond with this employment, and later 24 represented she did not provide therapy services while working for Agency 1 during her 25 investigative interview.
1 12. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ represented the following during her investigative interview:
2 a. Respondent did not really have a di...
FINDINGS OF FACT. 18. The WFF is located on Route 175, in Wallops Island, Accomack County, Virginia. The WFF consists of three land parcels: the Main Base Parcel, the Mainland Parcel, and Wallops Island. At this time, there are no Select Sites on the Mainland Parcel.
19. NASA has operated the WFF Main Base Parcel since 1959 and has owned it since 1961.
20. Wallops Island was uninhabited until 1883 when the United States Government purchased land for a Life Saving Station on the north end of Wallops Island operated by the United States Life-Saving Service. The Life-Saving Service merged with the Cutter Revenue Service and Steam Boat Inspection Service to form the U.S. Coast Guard in 1915. The original station was destroyed in 1933 and re-built in 1936 at its present location on Wallops Island.
21. In 1889, the remainder of Wallops Island was purchased by the Wallops Island Gun Club, a hunting club comprised of families from Delaware, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. The Club was incorporated and assumed ownership in 1933 as the Wallops Island Association, Inc.
22. The United States Navy (“Navy”) began purchasing private farmland near the Main Base Parcel in August 1942. The U.S. Department of the Army, Bureau of Public Works, began construction for an outlying airfield for Norfolk Naval Air Station in the fall 1942 and commissioned the Chincoteague Naval Auxiliary Air Station (“CNAAS”) in March 1943. The Navy used CNAAS primarily as a training facility for naval aviation units from 1943 to 1945; however, it was also used for anti-submarine operations.
23. In January 1946, the Naval Aviation Ordnance Test Station (“NAOTS”) was established at CNAAS. The NAOTS provided training for personnel and a test range to test, modify, and develop guided missiles, aircraft weapons, munitions, ordnance, and aviation fire control equipment. CNAAS became a Naval Air Station in 1950.
24. The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (“NACA”), the predecessor to NASA, leased land on Wallops Island from 1945 to 1947. NACA purchased Wallops Island from the Wallops Island Gun Club in 1947. The Navy leased land on north Wallops Island from NACA from 1947 to 1959 for munitions and ordnance testing, operations, and training.
25. The Navy ceased training and flight operations and declared the CNAAS excess in June 1959. The NAOTS was officially disestablished on June 30, 1959. All real property at the Main Base Parcel (CNAAS and NAOTS) was initially occupied by NASA in June 1959 and transferred to N...
FINDINGS OF FACT. The arbitrator will be required to make specific, written findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the parties will have the right to appeal or seek vacation or modification of an award only (1) if that award is based in whole, or in part, upon fraud or a failure to follow the procedures set forth in this Section 8 or (2) to the extent otherwise allowed by applicable law. Subject to the foregoing, the determination of the arbitrator shall be binding on all parties and shall not be subject to further review or appeal. Any judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The decision of the arbitrator will be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction. To the extent permitted by applicable EXHIBIT 2.2 law, the arbitrator will have the power to award recovery of all costs and fees (including attorneys' fees, administrative fees, and arbitrators' fees) to the prevailing party.
FINDINGS OF FACT. The Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry (“NMLS”) is an online licensing system created by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators. The NMLS allows an entity to submit mortgage banker license applications, renewals, reports, and amendments to multiple state regulators through one online system. The Department requires that mortgage banker license applications, request for renewals, and amendments be submitted via the NMLS pursuant to its authority under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 45-748 (Reissue 2021).