alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4323 

To amend the Truth in Lending Act to improve upon the definitions provided 

for points and fees in connection with a mortgage transaction. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2012 

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan (for himself, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. CLAY, and Mr. 

DAVID SCOTT of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Truth in Lending Act to improve upon the 

definitions provided for points and fees in connection 

with a mortgage transaction. 

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 ‘‘Consumer Mortgage 

5 Choice Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF POINTS AND FEES. 

7 (a) AMENDMENT TO SECTION 103 OF TILA.—Sec8 tion 103(bb)(4) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 

9 1602(bb)(4)) is amended— 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4323 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘, but 

2 not including compensation paid by a mortgage 

3 originator or a creditor to an individual person em4 ployed by the mortgage originator or creditor’’ after 

5 ‘‘transaction’’; and 

6 (2) in subparagraph (C)— 

7 (A) by striking ‘‘an escrow for future pay8 ment of taxes’’ and inserting ‘‘the charges set 

9 forth under section 106(e)(3)’’; 

10 (B) in clause (ii), by inserting ‘‘, except as 

11 retained by a creditor or its affiliate as a result 

12 of their participation in an affiliated business 

13 arrangement (as defined in section 2(7) of the 

14 Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 

15 (12 U.S.C. 2602(7))’’ after ‘‘compensation’’; 

16 and 

17 (C) by striking clause (iii) and inserting 

18 the following: 

19 ‘‘(iii) the charge is— 

20 ‘‘(I) a bona fide third-party 

21 charge not retained by the mortgage 

22 originator, creditor, or an affiliate of 

23 the creditor or mortgage originator; or 

24 ‘‘(II) a charge set forth in section 

25 106(e)(1).’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4323 IH

1 (b) AMENDMENT TO SECTION 129C OF TILA.—Sec2 tion 129C of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1639c) 

3 is amended— 

4 (1) in subsection (a)(5)(C), by striking ‘‘, 

5 other’’ and all that follows through ‘‘or mortgage 

6 originator’’; and 

7 (2) in subsection (b)(2)(C)(i), by striking 

8 ‘‘(other’’ and all that follows through ‘‘or mortgage 

9 originator)’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4163 

To amend certain provisions of the Truth in Lending Act related to the 

compensation of mortgage originators, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 7, 2012 

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California (for himself and Mr. SHERMAN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend certain provisions of the Truth in Lending Act 

related to the compensation of mortgage originators, 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 ‘‘Preserving Consumers’ 

5 Mortgage Origination Choices Act of 2012’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4163 IH

1 SEC. 2. COMPENSATION OF MORTGAGE ORIGINATORS BY 

2 MORTGAGE BROKERS. 

3 Subsection (c)(4) of section 129B of the Truth in 

4 Lending Act (as added by Public Law 111–203) is amend5 ed by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

6 ‘‘(E) prohibiting a mortgage originator 

7 who receives compensation directly from a con8 sumer in accordance with this section from 

9 compensating another mortgage originator em10 ployee, mortgage originator agent, or mortgage 

11 originator contractor based on the principal 

12 amount of the loan, provided that the amount 

13 of compensation received by such employee, 

14 agent, or contractor may not vary based on any 

15 other terms of the loan.’’. 

16 SEC. 3. LIMITED REDUCTION IN MORTGAGE ORIGINATOR 

17 COMPENSATION. 

18 Section 129B of such Act is amended— 

19 (1) by redesigning subsections (d), (e), and (f) 

20 as subsections (e), (f), and (g), respectively; and 

21 (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the fol22 lowing new subsection: 

23 ‘‘(d) REDUCTION IN MORTGAGE ORIGINATOR COM24 PENSATION TO PAY FOR COST INCREASES BEYOND THE

25 CONTROL OF THE ORIGINATOR.—A mortgage originator, 

26 at the request of a consumer, may reduce the amount of 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4163 IH

1 compensation being received by such originator to offset 

2 settlement charges, other than settlement charges con3 trolled by such originator, which are permitted under the 

4 Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (12 U.S.C. 2601– 

5 2617), that exceed the amounts previously disclosed on the 

6 good faith estimate of the settlement charges provided to 

7 such consumer pursuant to section 5(c) of such Act (12 

8 U.S.C. 2604(c)), provided that the originator’s compensa9 tion may not increase.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**MPD** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 0430 IN THE MATTER OF: V.K.B., Respondent and Appellant. **ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including January 11, 2022 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 30 2021

11/30/2021
Case Number: DA 20-0430
#### Joseph L. Yankanich et al., Respondents, v Thomas A. Griffo et al., Appellants.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs, on the decision at Trial Term, McDowell, J. (Appeal from judgment of Steuben Supreme Court—Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law, § 15.) Present— Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Dillon, Goldman and Witmer, JJ.
H. R. 4389 

One Hundred Twelfth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twelve 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 19 East 

Merced Street in Fowler, California, as the ‘‘Cecil E. Bolt Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. CECIL E. BOLT POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 19 East Merced Street in Fowler, California, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Cecil E. Bolt Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Cecil E. Bolt Post Office’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 102 Filed 04/02/10 Page 1 of 2Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 102 Filed 04/02/10 Page 2 of 2
#### Joseph F. Nigro et al., Appellants, v James T. Moore et al., Respondents.

[716 NYS2d 446]

Mercure, J. P.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered November 4, 1998. in Albany County, upon a verdict rendered in favor of defendants.

Plaintiffs commenced this negligence action in May 1995 to recover for injuries sustained in a June 7, 1994 motor vehicle accident. The matter proceeded to trial in October 1998 and the jury rendered a verdict in favor of defendants. Plaintiffs appeal, contending only that Supreme Court abused its discretion in precluding the testimony of their accident reconstruction expert, Raymond Hagglund, on the basis of their untimely response to defendants’ demand for expert disclosure. We disagree and accordingly affirm.

The record establishes that, despite the fact that defendants served a CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i) demand for expert disclosure in July 1995, plaintiffs provided no particulars regarding Hagglund until October 19, 1998, the first day of trial. Upon the argument of defendants’ ensuing oral preclusion motion, plaintiffs offered as excuses for their very tardy compliance that their current counsel was retained only a short time prior to the scheduled trial date, that plaintiffs’ new counsel thereupon sought but was denied an adjournment of the trial, and that Hagglund was retained by plaintiffs’ counsel but was on trial in Vermont for the three weeks prior to the trial. In response, defendants stated without contradiction that Supreme Court (Hughes, J.) had at a September 1998 pretrial conference directed plaintiffs to make a motion for leave to serve a late expert response and to serve such response no later than September 15,1998, later extended by stipulation to September 18, 1998.

*633Although CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i) provides that “where a party for good cause shown retains an expert an insufficient period of time before the commencement of trial to give appropriate notice thereof, the party shall not thereupon be precluded from introducing the expert’s testimony at the trial solely on grounds of noncompliance with this paragraph,” we agree with Supreme Court that plaintiffs made no showing of good cause for having retained their reconstruction expert more than three years after commencement of the action and a matter of just a few weeks prior to trial. In addition, they offered no excuse for their failure to comply with Supreme Court’s September 18, 1998 deadline for service of particulars regarding Hagglund. No reason has been given why the expert’s involvement in a trial in Vermont prevented plaintiffs from furnishing the required information and we can perceive none. We accordingly conclude that Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in precluding Hagglund’s testimony *(see, Meyer v Zeichner,*263 AD2d 597, 598-599; *Grassel v Albany Med. Ctr. Hosp.,*223 AD2d 803, 805, *lv denied and dismissed*88 NY2d 842; *Ingleston v Francis,*206 AD2d 745; *Vicinanzo v Vicinanzo,*193 AD2d 962, 967).

Peters, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

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

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Omtool, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert L. Voelk, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, tomy knowledge, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Robert L. Voelk     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Robert L. Voelk         |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| July 28, 2005      |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2454 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2454

             To suspend temporarily the duty on D-Mannose.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 2005

  Mr. Murphy introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To suspend temporarily the duty on D-Mannose.

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

SECTION 1. DESMODUR HL.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.70      D-Mannose (CAS No.  Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         3458-28-4)provide                                                  31/2009
                         d for in
                         subheadings
                         2940.00.60 and
                         9902.01.94)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### BURGESS, Respondent, v. WING, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March 8, 1905.)

Action by Elnora Burgess against James A. Wing. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
```

[House Document 106-300]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 106-300

 
      A REPORT ON UNITED STATES MILITARY FORCES DEPLOYED TO YEMEN

                               __________

                             COMMUNICATION

                                  FROM

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

HIS REPORT ON THE DEPLOYMENT OF UNITED STATES MILITARY FORCES SENT TO 
  ASSIST THE USS COLE AND TO PROVIDE MEDICAL, SECURITY, AND DISASTER 
  RESPONSE ASSISTANCE IN YEMEN

October 16, 2000.--Referred to the Committee on International Relations 
                       and ordered to be printed

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
89-011                     WASHINGTON : 2000

                                           The White House,
                                      Washington, October 14, 2000.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: At approximately 5:15 a.m. eastern 
daylight time, October 12, 2000, a small boat exploded 
alongside the USS COLE (DDG 67) while the USS COLE was mooring 
to a harbor fueling island during a refueling stop in the port 
of Aden, Yemen. A number of American sailors were killed or 
wounded, and the USS COLE suffered extensive damage. Department 
of Defense assets were immediately identified to provide 
medical, security, and disaster responses.
    Later in the day on October 12, 2000, approximately 45 
military personnel from U.S. Naval Forces Central Command 
deployed to Aden to provide medical, security, and disaster 
response assistance. In addition, a team of approximately 50 
U.S. military security personnel arrived in Aden in the early 
morning hours of October 13, 2000. It is also anticipated that 
additional similar security elements may be deployed to the 
area. The security personnel will enhance the ability of the 
United States to ensure the security of the USS COLE and the 
personnel responding to the incident. Although the security 
personnel are equipped for combat, their presence is solely for 
the purpose of assisting in on-site security. Finally, two U.S. 
Navy surface combatant vessels are operating in or near Yemeni 
territorial waters to provide communications and other support, 
as required. United States forces will redeploy as soon as the 
additional security support is determined to be necessary.
    I have taken this action pursuant to my constitutional 
authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in 
Chief and Chief Executive. I am providing this report as part 
of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent 
with the War Powers Resolution.
    I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action to 
assist in ensuring security of U.S. military forces and other 
personnel overseas.
            Sincerely,
                                                William J. Clinton.

                                  

```
### §3796hh–2. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796hh–2 was editorially reclassified as section 10463 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
#### Charles S. Kent, Appellant, v. Abram B. Young and Another, Respondents.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.
### §3154a. Performance awards

#### (a) In general

The Secretary may make a performance award in connection with a grant made, on or after October 27, 2004, to an eligible recipient for a project under section 3141 or 3149 of this title.

#### (b) Performance measures

#### (1) Regulations

The Secretary shall promulgate regulations to establish performance measures for making performance awards under subsection (a).

#### (2) Considerations

In promulgating regulations under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider the inclusion of performance measures that assess—

(A) whether the recipient meets or exceeds scheduling goals;

(B) whether the recipient meets or exceeds job creation goals;

(C) amounts of private sector capital investments leveraged; and

(D) such other factors as the Secretary determines to be appropriate.

#### (c) Amount of awards

#### (1) In general

The Secretary shall base the amount of a performance award made under subsection (a) in connection with a grant on the extent to which a recipient meets or exceeds performance measures established in connection with the grant.

#### (2) Maximum amount

The amount of a performance award may not exceed 10 percent of the amount of the grant.

#### (d) Use of awards

A recipient of a performance award under subsection (a) may use the award for any eligible purpose under this chapter, in accordance with section 3212 of this title and such regulations as the Secretary may promulgate.

#### (e) Federal share

Notwithstanding section 3144 of this title, the funds of a performance award may be used to pay up to 100 percent of the cost of an eligible project or activity.

#### (f) Treatment in meeting non-Federal share requirements

For the purposes of meeting the non-Federal share requirements under this, or any other, Act the funds of a performance award shall be treated as funds from a non-Federal source.

#### (g) Terms and conditions

In making performance awards under subsection (a), the Secretary shall establish such terms and conditions as the Secretary considers to be appropriate.

#### (h) Funding

The Secretary shall use any amounts made available for economic development assistance programs to carry out this section.

#### (i) Reporting requirement

The Secretary shall include information regarding performance awards made under this section in the annual report required under section 3213 of this title.

#### (j) Review by Comptroller General

#### (1) Review

The Comptroller General shall regularly review the implementation of this section.

#### (2) Report

Not later than 1 year after October 27, 2004, the Comptroller General shall submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report on the findings of the Comptroller on implementation of this subsection.

(Pub. L. 89–136, title II, §215, as added Pub. L. 108–373, title II, §210(a), Oct. 27, 2004, 118 Stat. 1764.)
§ 130.17 Utilization of and access to reports and records. ( a ) All information reported and records maintained under this part will be made available, upon request for utilization by standing committees of the Congress and subcommittees thereof, and by United States Government agencies, in accordance with § 39(d) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2779(d)), and reports based upon such information will be submitted to Congress in accordance with sections 36(a)(7) and 36(b)(1) of that Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(a)(7) and (b)(1)) or any other applicable law.
( b ) All confidential business information provided pursuant to this part shall be protected against disclosure to the extent provided by law.
( c ) Nothing in this section shall preclude the furnishing of information to foreign governments for law enforcement or regulatory purposes under international arrangements between the United States and any foreign government.
[58 FR 39323, July 22, 1993, as amended at 71 FR 20555, Apr. 21, 2006]
#### Daniel Perla Associates, L.P., Appellant, v ZLD Realty, L. L. C., Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[716 NYS2d 298]

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice Bowman, J.), entered July 13, 1999, which, in an action to foreclose a mortgage, *inter alia,*directed that plaintiff mortgagee accept the sum of $145,665 in full satisfaction of the mortgage, and bringing up for review a prior order, entered February 10, 1999, which, insofar'as challenged, granted defendant mortgagor’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, determined that defendant is entitled to certain reductions in the principal of the mortgage, and directed a hearing to determine the amounts of those reductions and otherwise compute the outstanding balance on the mortgage, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court properly found that plaintiff had, in bad faith, breached its obligations under the contract. An action in foreclosure is an equitable action, and the equities herein compel the conclusion that plaintiff was not entitled to reject tender of payment, then use that rejection as a basis for holding defendants in default *(see, Futterman v Calce,*226 AD2d 306, 307). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Ellerin, Lerner and Rubin, JJ.
### §3222. Savings clause

To the extent that any portion of grants made under this chapter are used for an economic development project that involves remediation, the remediation shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws and standards.

(Pub. L. 89–136, title VI, §612, as added Pub. L. 108–373, title VI, §604(a), Oct. 27, 2004, 118 Stat. 1770.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3222, Pub. L. 89–136, title VII, §712, Aug. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 575; Pub. L. 93–567, title III, §302, Dec. 31, 1974, 88 Stat. 1855, which related to labor standards and rate of wages, was renumbered section 602 of Pub. L. 89–136 by Pub. L. 105–393 and transferred to section 3212 of this title.

Prior sections 3223 to 3226 were repealed by Pub. L. 105–393, title I, §102(b)(3), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3617.

Section 3223, Pub. L. 89–136, title VII, §713, Aug. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 575, required maintenance of records of approved applications and availability for public inspection.

Section 3224, Pub. L. 89–136, title VII, §714, Aug. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 575, related to recordkeeping and audits.

Section 3225, Pub. L. 89–136, title VII, §715, Aug. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 575, extended benefits to redevelopment areas under former section 2504 of this title.

Section 3226, Pub. L. 89–136, title VII, §716, Aug. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 576, prohibited statutory construction which could cause diminution in other Federal assistance.