alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph A. Ramos, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 508]

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John J. Connell, J.), rendered July 25, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]). Contrary to the contention of defendant, the police had the requisite reasonable suspicion to stop and detain him for a showup identification procedure *(see People v Barnes,*4 AD3d 433 [2004], *lv denied*3 NY3d 636 [2004]). Defendant fit the general description of one of the suspects and, within minutes of the crime, was observed by police in proximity to the crime scene *(see People v Wiley,*32 AD3d 1352 [2006]).

Contrary to defendant’s further contention, County Court properly determined that the showup identification procedure was not unduly suggestive *(see generally People v Ortiz,*90 NY2d 533, 537 [1997]). After obtaining a more complete description of the suspect from the victim, a police officer asked defendant to accompany him, and defendant willingly did so. Defendant was not handcuffed and was driven 2V2 miles from the scene, where he then stood approximately 10 feet from the victim in well-lit conditions, and was identified by the victim approximately one hour after the robbery. We therefore conclude that “the procedures used were reasonable under the circumstances” *(People v Brisco,*99 NY2d 596, 597 [2003]). Present—Scudder, J.P, Kehoe, Gorski, Smith and Pine, JJ.
§ 2.1 Scope and purpose. ( a ) This chapter sets forth the policies, procedures, and delegations under which the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register carries out its general responsibilities under chapter 15 of title 44, United States Code.
( b ) A primary purpose of this chapter is to inform the public of the nature and uses of Federal Register publications.
EXHIBIT 99(i)(8)


                                                                    June 1, 2000


For Release:   Immediately

   CENTRAL HUDSON'S SHARE OF NINE MILE UNIT 2 PLANT TO BE INCLUDED IN AUCTION

       Central  Hudson Gas & Electric  Corporation's  9 percent  interest in the
Nine Mile Point Unit 2 nuclear plant will be included  within the auction of the
facility  announced today.  Central Hudson joined New York State Electric & Gas,
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation,  and Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation in
announcing the auction of their respective  shares of the plant.  Niagara Mohawk
also announced  that it will auction the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Plant,  which it
owns exclusively.

       The  decision to auction the plants is  consistent  with a New York State
Public Service  Commission order urging the owners to determine the market value
of the facilities through an open, competitive process. Bids are scheduled to be
due  within  the next two  moths.  The  closing  of any sale will be  subject to
regulatory approval.

       Nine Mile Point 2, a  1,148-megawatt  boiling-water  reactor,  is jointly
owned by Central  Hudson (9 percent),  NYSEG (18  percent),  Niagara  Mohawk (41
percent),  RG&E (14 percent) and the Long Island Power  Authority  (18 percent).
Niagara  Mohawk  operates  both  plants.  LIPA is not  currently  including  its
ownership interest in Nine Mile Point Unit 2 in the auction sale.

       In June 1999,  Niagara  Mohawk and NYSEG  announced that they had reached
agreement to sell their  interests  in units 1 and 2 to AmerGen  Energy Co. That
agreement was mutually terminated by the three parties.

       The selling owners have retained J.P.  Morgan and Navigant  Consulting to
manage the auction process. For further  information,  contact either Roger Wood
at  J.P.  Morgan  (212-  648-3530)  or  Lisa  Quilici  at  Navigant   Consulting
(781-564-9744).

                                     # # #
#### EDUARDO GUADALUPE *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

Decided July 7, 2004

*James M. Fox,*special public defender, in support of the petition.

*Mitchell S. Brody,*senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

The petitioner Eduardo Guadalupe’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 83 Conn. App. 180 (AC 24180), is denied.
**MIDLAND CAPITAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION****EXHIBIT 11****STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE**                   Three Months Ended  Six Months Ended   December 31,  December 31,   2006  2005  2006  2005 Net Income $171,486  $253,392  $392,726  $527,241              Weighted average common sharesoutstanding for basic computation  372,600   372,600   372,600   372,600              Basic earnings per share $0.46  $0.68  $1.05  $1.42              Weighted average common sharesoutstanding for basic computation  372,600   372,600   372,600   372,600 Common stock equivalents due todilutive effect of stock options  —   —   —   —              Weighted average common shares andequivalents outstanding fordiluted computation  372,600   372,600   372,600   372,600              Diluted earnings per share $0.46  $0.68  $1.05  $1.42
From: Jones, Earl F (GE, Appl & Light) 

Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:52 PM 

To: 'AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov' 

Cc: Bryan Berringer 

Subject: GE Refrigerator Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver

  

Dear Mr. Assistant Secretary:

GE Appliances, an operating division of General Electric Co., ("GE") is a leading 

manufacturer and marketer of household appliances, including, as relevant to 

this proceeding, refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers, files this Application for 

Interim Waiver (“Application”) and Petition for Waiver ("Petition"). GE requests 

that you grant it a waiver from certain parts of the Uniform Test Method for 

Measuring the Energy Consumption of Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers

promulgated by the Department on the grounds that the basic design of the 

product prevents testing in accordance with the prescribed test procedure. This 

request, which is attached, is filed pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §430.27.

I have also attached a Certificate of Service attesting to the fact that I have 

provided notice and copies of the Application and Petition to the parties listed 

thereon.

Earl F Jones

Sr. Counsel, Government Relations & 

Regulatory Compliance

GE Appliances & Lighting 

AP2-225

Louisville, KY 40225

(502) 452-3164 – office 

(502) 452-0347 – fax 

(502) 287-7770 - cell
**Exhibit 32.3**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

** PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES‐OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

I, Keith S. Franz, Chief Financial Officer, in connection with the Annual Report of CĪON Investment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Annual Report”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

 

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

 

2.       The informationcontained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date:March 26, 2015

 

|   |                                                                                                                 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | /s/ Keith S. Franz

Keith  S. Franz  Chief Financial Officer* *

*(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)* |
|   | CĪON  Investment Corporation                                                                                    |

 

 

----
# C_2013376EN.01001302.xml

| 21.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 376/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 376/13

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2013/C 376/09

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 25.10.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 25.10.2013-31.12.2013 |
| Member State | Spain |
| Stock or group of stocks | RED/51214D. |
| Species | Redfish (Sebastes spp.) |
| Zone | EU and international waters of V; international waters of XII and XIV |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 76/TQ40 |

Date and time of closure

25.10.2013

Duration

25.10.2013-31.12.2013

Member State

Spain

Stock or group of stocks

RED/51214D.

Species

Redfish (Sebastes spp.)

Sebastes

Zone

EU and international waters of V; international waters of XII and XIV

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

76/TQ40

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
### §577. Promotions: effect of failure of selection for

A warrant officer who has been considered for promotion by a selection board convened under section 573 of this title, but not selected, shall be considered for promotion by each subsequent selection board that considers officers in his grade (or grade and competitive category) until he is retired or separated or he is selected for promotion. However, the Secretary concerned may, by regulation, preclude from consideration by a selection board by which he would otherwise be eligible to be considered, a warrant officer who has an established separation date that is within 90 days after the date on which the board is convened.

(Added Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title XI, §1112(a), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1497.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 561 of this title prior to repeal by Pub. L. 102–190, §1112(a).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Feb. 1, 1992, see section 1132 of Pub. L. 102–190, set out as an Effective Date of 1991 Amendment note under section 521 of this title.
### ^•.;iH!^bNTO F BEFOR E TH E ;,, , , ,^ , DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N ^-1- 8 p 1:3 3 OFFIC E O F TH E SECRETAR Y WASHINGTON . DC . Supplemen t t o th e Applicatio n o f VIGOJE TSA.DE.C V DOCKE TNo . OS T Fo ra n exemptio n Pursuan t t o 4 9 U.S. C 4010 9

SUPPLEMEN TT O TH E APPLICATIO N FO R VIGOJE TSA.DE.C V FO R TH E REINSTATEMEN TO F A N EXEMPTIO N Communication s concernin g thi s documen t ma yb e sen t to : Vig o Je t SA.DE.C V C/ 0 Rober t Sander s Pla n D e Guadalup e Airpor t Hange r4 4 Ramo s Arizpe , Mexic o 

### 2590 0 Designate d Representitiv e fo r Vig o Je t SA.DE.C V Februar y15 , 201 2BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMENTOF TRANSPORTATIO N OFFIC E O F TH E SECRETAR Y WASHINGTON . DC . Supplemen t t o th e Applicatio n o f VIGOJETSA.DE.C

V DOCKE TNo . OS T Fo ra n exemptio n Pursuan t t o 4 9 U.S. C 4010 9

SUPPLEMENTT O TH E APPLICATIO N FO R VIGOJETSA.DE.C

V FO R TH E REINSTATEMENTO F A N EXEMPTIO N Pursuan t t o 4 9 U.S.C . 4010 9 an d th e department s regulations . Vig o Jet SA. DE . C V hereb yapplie s fo rreinstatemen t o fit s exemptio n fro m 4 9 U.S.C . 4130 1 whic h authorize s Vig o Je t t o engag e i n charte rforeig n ai rtransportatio n o fpersons , ambulanc e flights , an d carg o betwee n th e Unite d State s an d Mexic o wit h smal l aircraf t an d subjec t t o prio rDepartmen t approval , betwee n othe rcountrie s an d th e Unite d States . Vig o Je t als o request s reinstatemen t o fit s stopove r privilege s an d relie f fro m an yrequiremen t t o obtai n advance d approva l fo reac h Mexica n an d U.S . flight . Th e departmen t ha

s grante d th e abov e authorit yt o Vig o Je t byNotic e o fActio n Take n date d Septembe r08 , 2009 , Vig o Jet request s tha t thi s authority , whic h expire d o n Septembe r08 , 201 1 b e reinstate d fo ra perio d o f tw o year s o ralternativel yfo ra perio d o fa t leas t on e year .I n support o f thi s application , Vig o Je t state s a s follows ; VIGOJETSA.DE.C

V faile d t o rene wit s applicatio n i n Septembe r2011 becaus e a n oversigh t i n thei racministrativ e offices . VIGOJETSA.DE.C V ha d severa l administrativ e personne l transfe rt o othe rpositi cn s an d the yfaile d t o notif ythei rreplacement s tha t a renewa l o fDO Tshoul d hav e bee n don e wel l befor e Septembe r08 , 2011 whe n i t expired . Since th e initia l applicatio n an d fitnes s revie wther e wer e n o significan t change s an d Vig o Je t intend s t o operat e a

s i t ha d whe n i t ha d th e authorit yt o d o so . Th e ownershi p an d operatio n has no t changed . WHEREFORE . Vig o Je t respectfull yrequest s reinstatemen t o fit s authorit yt o engag e i n charte r foreig n ai rtransportatio n o f persons , ambulanc e an d carg o wit h smal l aircraf t a s se t fort h herein , an d suc h othe rrelie f a

s mayb e i n th e publi cinterest .

Respectfull ysubmttte d by . Rober t Sander s Designate d Representativ e

Februar y15 , 201 2
FILED IN1st COURT OF APPEALS      HOUSTON, TEXAS4/20/2015 8:41:46 AMCHRISTOPHER A. PRINE              Clerk
Exhibit 31.1




Certification of Senior Officer in Charge of the Servicing Function


of the Servicer Pursuant to Rule 15d-14(d)









CERTIFICATION






I, Mark Kaczynski, certify that:




1.           I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Nissan Auto Receivables 2011-B Trust (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);




2.           Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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 period covered by this report;




3.           Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;




4.           I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and




5.           All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.




In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party:  Citibank, N.A.




Date: June 26, 2015




By:/s/ Mark Kaczynski


Mark Kaczynski


President and Chief Executive Officer of


Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation


(senior officer in charge of the


servicing function)
### NUMBER 13

- 1 5

- 00 246

- CV



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

STRIPES LLC

, Appellant,

v.

HAZZEM MRAYYAN

, Appellee.

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. One

of Nueces County, Texas

.



## ORDER

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

On J u n e 1

, 2 0 1 5 t h i s Co u rt g ra n t e d ap p e l l an t Str i pe s LL C ’s mo ti o n f o r a n

eme r g en cy st a y pe n d i n g ap p ea l o f a h e a r i n g s e t f o r J u n e 4

, 2 01 5 o n a p p e l l e e ’s mo ti o n

to l i f t t h e tr i a l c ou rt’s p re v io u s o rd e r s t a y i n g t h e c a s e pe n d ing b i n d i n g a rbitra t io n

. At t h is

Co u rt’s re q ue s t

, ap p e l l e e f i le d a re s p o n se t h e s a m e d a y

.A ppe l la n t a r g ue s t ha t i f t h e tr i a l c ou rt rules o n ap p e l l e e ’s m o ti o n t h e n it w i ll in te r f e re

w ith t h is C ou rt’s jur i s d i cti o n o v e r ap p e l l ant ’s a pp e a l o f t h e t e m po rary inj un cti o n

.

H o w e v e r, t h e S u p r e m e Cou rt o f T e x a s d isco u ra g e s po st pon i n g a tr i a l o n t h e me r i ts

w h i l e a w a iting rul i n g s o n a n a p pea l o f a t e m po rary inj un cti o n “ ab s en t c om pe l l ing

ci r c um s t an c e s.” Co a l. o f C i ti e s f o r Af fo r d ab le Uti l

. Ra te s v. Thi

r d Co u rt o f A p

p ea l s

, 7 8 7

S

. W

. 2 d 94 6

, 9 4 7 ( Te x

. 19 9 0 ) ( pe r c u r ia m ) ; s e e T E X

. R. C I V

. P

. 6 8 3 ( “ T h e a p pea l o f a

t emp o rary inj un c t ion s h a ll c on stit u te n o c au s e f o r de lay o f t h e tr i a l ”)

. A p pe l l an t ma k e s

s e v e ral a r g ume n ts re g a r d ing t h e po ss i b le e f fe ct o f t h e tr i a l c o u r t ’s d e cis io n o n t h e me r i ts

o f a p p e l l e e ’s mo t i o n

, b u t a n ap p ea l o f a t e m p o rary inj un cti o n ma y n o t b e u s e d to o b t a i n

a n a d v an ce d e c is i o n o n t h e me r i ts o f a c a s e

. In re Tex. B d

. o f P a rd o n s & P a role s

, 98 9

S

. W

. 2 d 3 60

, 3 6 2 ( T e x

. 19 9 8 ) (or ig

. p roc eed in g ); Ira n ian M u sl i m Org. v. C i ty o f S a n

A n t on i o

, 6 1 5 S

. W

. 2 d 2 0 2

, 2 0 8 ( T e x

. 19 8 1 )

.

T h e Co u rt, h a v ing e x a m in e d a n d f u l l y c on sid e r e d t h e m o ti o n f o r e m e r g e n cy s ta y

,

ap p e l l e e ’s res p o n s e

, a n d t h e e x h ibits a t t a c he d to b o th do c um en ts, i s o f t h e op in i o n t ha t

t h e s t a y s hou ld b e l i f t e d

. Acc o rd i n g l y

, t h e st a y i mpo s e d b y ou r o r d e r o f J u n e 1

, 2 0 1 5

i s he re b y L I F T ED.

IT IS S O ORDERED.

PER C U RIAM

D e l i v e red an d f i le d t h e

4th da y o f J une

, 2 0 1 5

.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TRUSTEE FOR

SHEPARD LAND TRUST,

Appellant,

v.

ROCKET MORTGAGE LLC, f/k/a QUICKEN LOANS, INC.,

STEFAN THOMPSON, NADINE THOMPSON,

HANNA DEVELOPMENT CORP d/b/a HANNA DEVELOPMENT 

CORPORATION, SOCIETY HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., 

and CANNONGATE PROPERTY OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC.,

Appellees.

No. 4D2023-0432

[December 21, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Richard L. Oftedal, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502019CA006028. 

James R. Ackley of Law Offices of James R. Ackley, P.A., West Palm 

Beach, for appellant.

Ileen J. Cantor of LOGS Legal Group, LLP, Boca Raton, for appellee, 

Rocket Mortgage, LLC.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### § 166.606 What happens to a bond if a violation occurs?

We may apply the bond to remedy the violation, in which case we will require the permittee to submit a replacement bond of an appropriate amount.
#### Edward Lynch, Respondent, v. Elektron Manufacturing Company, Appellant, Impleaded with Others.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. (Ingraham and McLaughlin, JJ., dissenting.)
**Exhibit 31**

EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)Certifications. 

I, James Buccola, certify that: 

1. I havereviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the CFCRE Commercial Mortgage Trust 2011-C2 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their relatedattestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described insuch reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I havereasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: 

KeyBank National Association, as Master Servicer, LNR Partners,LLC, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, Citibank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator, Citibank, N.A., as Custodian, TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Operating Advisor, and U.S. Bank National Association, asServicing Function Participant. 

Dated: March 25, 2019 

/s/ James Buccola 

ChiefExecutive Officer 

(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
### **CHAPTER 749—MISCELLANEOUS INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DUTIES**

Sec.
7381.
Fatality reviews.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2018**—Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §808(e)(2)(B), (f)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1839, redesignated chapter 375 of this title as this chapter and item 4061 as 7381.