alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Janet Rosenblatt and Gerald Nahay, Respondents. The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Janet Rosenblatt, Appellant. The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gerald Nahay, Appellant.

[717 NYS2d 9]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.), entered on or about January 20, 1999, which, *inter alia,*granted defendants’ motions to set aside a jury verdict convicting them of two counts of failure to collect sales tax and four counts of willfully failing to file a tax return, and dismissed those counts, and judgments, same court and Justice, rendered same date, convicting defendants of twelve counts of selling tickets in violation of the maximum premium price and one count of aggravated ticket speculation, and imposing fines, unanimously affirmed.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the court properly entertained defendants’ motions to set aside the verdict since defendants’ objections to the court’s charge preserved the *62pertinent issue raised in such motion for review as a matter of law (CPL 330.30 [1]; 470.05 [2]). The court properly considered extrinsic material in interpreting the tax laws in question. In light of rulings and opinions from the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, as well as the fact that legislation is pending to include the markups charged by brokers such as defendants within the tax laws, we agree with the court that such laws do not currently require a sales tax to be paid on receipts derived from the resale of tickets to sports and entertainment events. Contrary to the People’s argument, we find no basis for distinguishing, for Tax Law purposes, between tickets resold in compliance with or in violation of the “anti-scalping” price restrictions contained in article 25 of the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law. Accordingly, the court properly granted defendants’ motion to set aside that portion of the verdict convicting them of the .sales tax counts of the indictment and dismissed those counts.

However, the court properly denied defendants’ motions with respect to the remaining convictions. To the extent that defendants denominate their cross-appeal an appeal from that portion of the order denying their motion as to such convictions, such purported appeal is subsumed in their appeal from the judgment of conviction (CPL 450.10; *People v Pollock,*67 AD2d 608, *affd*50 NY2d 547; *compare,*CPL 450.20 [3]). The maximum ticket price restrictions contained in article 25 of the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law are not unconstitutional *(see, Gold v DiCarlo,*235 F Supp 817, *affd*380 US 520; *People v Concert Connection,*211 AD2d 310, *appeal dismissed*86 NY2d 837).

We have considered and rejected the parties’ remaining arguments for affirmative relief. Concur — Mazzarelli, J. P., Lerner, Rubin, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Charles E. Wolf, Judgment-Creditor Respondent-Appellant, against Irving Poretz, Judgment-Debtor Appellant-Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed insofar as it directs the judgment debtor to pay $50 per week on account of the judgment of $16,000, pursuant to the provisions of section 793 of the Civil Practice Act. It is modified, however, to the extent of appointing a receiver who is to receive the payments so ordered and who is to pay out the sums thus collected to the person entitled thereto upon court order after due notice to all interested parties. By this procedure, the rights of all claimants will be adequately protected. Settle order on notice. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Breitel and Bergan, JJ.
### §292x. Distribution of assets from loan funds

#### (a) Distribution after termination of fund

If a school terminates a loan fund established under an agreement pursuant to section 292q(b) of this title, or if the Secretary for good cause terminates the agreement with the school, there shall be a capital distribution as follows:

(1) The Secretary shall first be paid an amount which bears the same ratio to such balance in such fund on the date of termination of the fund as the total amount of the Federal capital contributions to such fund by the Secretary pursuant to section 292q(b)(2)(A) of this title bears to the total amount in such fund derived from such Federal capital contributions and from funds deposited therein pursuant to section 292q(b)(2)(B) of this title.

(2) The remainder of such balance shall be paid to the school.

#### (b) Payment of proportionate share to Secretary

If a capital distribution is made under subsection (a), the school involved shall, after the capital distribution, pay to the Secretary, not less often than quarterly, the same proportionate share of amounts received by the school in payment of principal or interest on loans made from the loan fund established pursuant to section 292q(b) of this title as was determined by the Secretary under subsection (a).

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title VII, §728, as added Pub. L. 102–408, title I, §102, Oct. 13, 1992, 106 Stat. 2021.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 728 of act July 1, 1944, was classified to section 294a of this title prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 102–408.

Another prior section 728 of act July 1, 1944, was classified to section 293h of this title prior to renumbering by Pub. L. 94–484.
522.1503 Procedures for acquiring end products on the List of Products Requiring Contractor Certification as to Forced or Indentured Child Labor. 		    Refer matters for investigation under FAR 22.1503(e) to the appropriate Office of Inspector General Field Office. 	  **Parent topic:** Subpart 522.15 - Prohibition of Acquisition of Products Produced by Forced or Indentured Child Labor
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 2004 / Notices 74569

be reached at 1–888–912–1227 or 954–

423–7977, or post comments to the Web 

site: http://www.improveirs.org. 

The agenda will include the 

following: Various IRS issues.

Dated: December 9, 2004. 

Bernard Coston, 

Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 04–27370 Filed 12–13–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service 

Open Meeting of the Area 1 Taxpayer 

Advocacy Panel (Including the States 

of New York, Connecticut, 

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New 

Hampshire, Vermont and Maine)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 

1 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 

conducted (via teleconference). The 

Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting 

public comments, ideas and suggestions 

on improving customer service at the 

Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held 

Wednesday, January 5, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marisa Knispel at 1–888–912–1227 (tollfree), or 718–488–3557 (non toll-free).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An open 

meeting of the Area 1 Taxpayer 

Advocacy Panel will be held 

Wednesday, January 5, 2005 from 11:30 

a.m. e.t. to 12:30 p.m. e.t. via a 

telephone conference call. Individual 

comments will be limited to 5 minutes. 

If you would like to have the TAP 

consider a written statement, please call 

1–888–912–1227 or 718–488–3557, or 

write Marisa Knispel, TAP Office, 10 

MetroTech Center, 625 Fulton Street, 

Brooklyn, NY 11201. Due to limited 

conference lines, notification of intent 

to participate in the telephone 

conference call meeting must be made 

with Marisa Knispel. Ms. Knispel can be 

reached at 1–888–912–1227 or 718–

488–3557, or post comments to the Web 

site: http://www.improveirs.org. 

The agenda will include various IRS 

issues.

Dated: December 8, 2004. 

Tersheia Carter, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 04–27371 Filed 12–13–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4273 

To clarify that compliance with an emergency order under section 202(c) 

of the Federal Power Act may not be considered a violation of any 

Federal, State, or local environmental law or regulation, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 28, 2012 

Mr. OLSON (for himself, Mr. DOYLE, Mr. TERRY, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, 

Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois, and Mr. GONZALEZ) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To clarify that compliance with an emergency order under 

section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act may not be 

considered a violation of any Federal, State, or local 

environmental law or regulation, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Resolving Environ5 mental and Grid Reliability Conflicts Act of 2012’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4273 IH

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL POWER ACT. 

2 (a) COMPLIANCE WITH OR VIOLATION OF ENVIRON3 MENTAL LAWS WHILE UNDER EMERGENCY ORDER.— 

4 Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 

5 824a(c)) is amended— 

6 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(c)’’; and 

7 (2) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘An 

8 order issued under this section should require gen9 eration, delivery, interchange, or transmission of 

10 electric energy only during times necessary to meet 

11 the emergency and serve the public interest, and, to 

12 the extent reasonable, be consistent with any other 

13 applicable Federal law, including any environmental 

14 law or regulation, and endeavor to minimize any ad15 verse environmental impacts. 

16 ‘‘(2)(A) To the extent any omission or action taken 

17 by a party, which is necessary to comply with an order 

18 issued under paragraph (1), including any omission or ac19 tion taken to voluntarily comply with such order, results 

20 in noncompliance with, or causes such party to not comply 

21 with, any Federal, State, or local environmental law or 

22 regulation, such omission or action shall not be considered 

23 a violation of such environmental law or regulation, or 

24 subject such party to any requirement, civil or criminal 

25 liability, or a citizen suit under such environmental law 

26 or regulation. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4273 IH

1 ‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘environmental law’ 

2 does not include the Occupational Safety and Health Act 

3 of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.).’’. 

4 (b) TEMPORARY CONNECTION OR CONSTRUCTION BY

5 MUNICIPALITIES.—Section 202(d) of the Federal Power 

6 Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(d)) is amended by inserting ‘‘or mu7 nicipality’’ before ‘‘engaged in the transmission or sale of 

8 electric energy’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\CRBALL\2007\5634\Order re March 12 hearing.wpd

Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE TRANSPACIFIC PASSENGER AIRTRANSPORTATION ANTITRUSTLITIGATION                                                                      /

This document relates to: ALL ACTIONS                                                                      /

No. C 07-05634 CRB

MDL 1913

ORDER

The Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss will be held in abeyance pending a

determination of the applicability of the Bankruptcy Court’s injunction to these proceedings. 

The merits of those motions will therefore not be the subject of the hearing scheduled for

March 12, 2010.  Instead, the parties should be prepared to discuss the merits of Defendants’

Motion To Stay Proceedings Upon Notice of Injunction in In Re: Japan Airlines.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2010                                                            CHARLES  R. BREYERUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-01458-CRB   Document 7   Filed 03/03/10   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2018-03-08T19:00:32-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
§ 1508.205 Why is it important if a particular transaction is a covered transaction? The importance of a covered transaction depends upon who you are. ( a ) As a participant in the transaction, you have the responsibilities laid out in Subpart C of this part. Those include responsibilities to the person or Federal agency at the next higher tier from whom you received the transaction, if any. They also include responsibilities if you subsequently enter into other covered transactions with persons at the next lower tier.
( b ) As a Federal official who enters into a primary tier transaction, you have the responsibilities laid out in subpart D of this part.
( c ) As an excluded person, you may not be a participant or principal in the transaction unless— ( 1 ) The person who entered into the transaction with you allows you to continue your involvement in a transaction that predates your exclusion, as permitted under § 1508.310 or § 1508.415; or
( 2 ) A(n) ADF official obtains an exception from the ADF President to allow you to be involved in the transaction, as permitted under § 1508.120.
§ 229.125 Effect of other requirements. ( a ) *Effect of other Federal provisions.* The obligations imposed by these Title IX regulations are independent of, and do not alter, obligations not to discriminate on the basis of sex imposed by Executive Order 11246, 3 CFR, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339; as amended by Executive Order 11375, 3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 684; as amended by Executive Order 11478, 3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 803; as amended by Executive Order 12087, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 230; as amended by Executive Order 12107, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 264; sections 704 and 855 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295m, 298b-2); Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e *et seq.*); the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (29 U.S.C. 206); and any other Act of Congress or Federal regulation.
( b ) *Effect of State or local law or other requirements.* The obligation to comply with these Title IX regulations is not obviated or alleviated by any State or local law or other requirement that would render any applicant or student ineligible, or limit the eligibility of any applicant or student, on the basis of sex, to practice any occupation or profession.
( c ) *Effect of rules or regulations of private organizations.* The obligation to comply with these Title IX regulations is not obviated or alleviated by any rule or regulation of any organization, club, athletic or other league, or association that would render any applicant or student ineligible to participate or limit the eligibility or participation of any applicant or student, on the basis of sex, in any education program or activity operated by a recipient and that receives Federal financial assistance.
### §300ff–27a. Spousal notification

#### (a) In general

The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall not make a grant under part B of title XXVI of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff–21 et seq.) to any State unless such State takes administrative or legislative action to require that a good faith effort be made to notify a spouse of a known HIV-infected patient that such spouse may have been exposed to the human immunodeficiency virus and should seek testing.

#### (b) Definitions

For purposes of this section:

#### (1) Spouse

The term "spouse" means any individual who is the marriage partner of an HIV-infected patient, or who has been the marriage partner of that patient at any time within the 10-year period prior to the diagnosis of HIV infection.

#### (2) HIV-infected patient

The term "HIV-infected patient" means any individual who has been diagnosed to be infected with the human immunodeficiency virus.

#### (3) State

The term "State" means any of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, or any territory of the United States.

(Pub. L. 104–146, §8, May 20, 1996, 110 Stat. 1372.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Public Health Service Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, 58 Stat. 682. Part B of title XXVI of the Act is classified generally to this part. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 201 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Ryan White CARE Act Amendments of 1996, and not as part of the Public Health Service Act which comprises this chapter.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1996, see section 13 of Pub. L. 104–146, set out as an Effective Date of 1996 Amendment note under section 300ff–11 of this title.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David Reade, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment (described in the notice of appeal as a “ final sentence ”) of the County Court, Richmond County, rendered January 22, 1960 after a jury trial, convicting him of arson in the first degree, and sentencing him as a first felony offender to a term of 20 to 40 years. Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                         41,239
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,239
<CGS>                                           27,835
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,835
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,958
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 858
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,831
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,302
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,529
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 35.1



SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT



Re: Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA LLC in its capacity
as Servicer (the “Servicer”) under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of September 1, 2019, among Mercedes-Benz
Auto Receivables Trust 2019-1, as Issuer, Daimler Retail Receivables LLC, as Depositor, and Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA
LLC, as Seller and Servicer (the “Servicing Agreement”), for the period from January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021
(the “Reporting Period”).



I, Brian T. Stevens, certify that:



| | (a) | A review of the Servicer’s activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement
has been made under my supervision.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement
in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: March 24, 2022



| | /s/ Brian T. Stevens                 | 
| | ------------------------------------ | 
| | Name: Brian T. Stevens              
| | Title: Vice President and Controller
#### In the Matter of Levi Harner et al., Petitioners, v. New York State Harness Racing Commission, Respondent.

Determination unanimously annulled, with $50 costs and disbursements. Memorandum: Following a hearing, respondent found that petitioners violated rule 18 (§ 4 [P]) of the New York State Harness Racing Commission Rules by driving in a manner unsatisfactory to the judges due to indifference or lack of effort and suspended their licenses. We find no substantial evidence in support of these findings. (Review of the determination of the State Harness Racing Commission, affirming the suspension of petitioners’ licenses for driving harness horses for five days, by judges at Batavia Downs, which proceeding was transferred to the Appellate Division for determination by order of Erie Special Term.) Present—-Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4278 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act with respect to permit 

requirements for dredged or fill material. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 28, 2012 

Mr. HURT (for himself and Mr. ALTMIRE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act with 

respect to permit requirements for dredged or fill material. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Preserving Rural Re5 sources Act of 2012’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PERMITS FOR DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL. 

7 Section 404(f) of the Federal Water Pollution Con8 trol Act (33 U.S.C. 1344(f)) is amended— 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4278 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘Except as 

2 provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, the dis3 charge’’ and inserting ‘‘The discharge’’; and 

4 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘having as its 

5 purpose bringing an area of the navigable waters 

6 into a use to which it was not previously subject, 

7 where the flow or circulation of navigable waters 

8 may be impaired or the reach of such waters be re9 duced,’’ and inserting ‘‘having as its purpose bring10 ing an area into a use not described in paragraph 

11 (1)’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
ACCEPTED 12-14-00319-CR TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS 6/19/2015 1:49:38 PM CATHY LUSK CLERK