alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

Kearny Financial Corp.

Fairfield, New Jersey

 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-130203 and 333-130204) of Kearny Financial Corp. (the “Company”) of our reports dated September 12, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, which appear in the Annual Report to Shareholders, which is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

 

Beard Miller Company LLP

Clark, New Jersey

September 12, 2008
### **CHAPTER 41—UNINSPECTED VESSELS GENERALLY**

Sec.
4101.
Application.
4102.
Safety equipment.
4103.
Exemptions.
[4104.
Repealed.]
4105.
Uninspected passenger vessels.
4106.
Penalties.

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Chapter 41 applies to vessels that are not subject to inspection and certification under chapter 33.

The Federal authority to regulate uninspected vessels originated with the Motorboat Act of 1910 (Public Law 61–201, 36 Stat. 462) when Congress established standards with respect to navigation lights, machinery requirements, life preservers, and for the licensing of operators on small vessels carrying passengers. This was an extension of Federal regulatory authority over certain non-steam-propelled vessels, that is, those recreational vessels and commercial vessels that are propelled by machinery other than steam.

Thirty years later, the 1910 Act was amended by the Motorboat Act of 1940 (Public Law 76–484, 54 Stat. 163), which added to the equipment that was required and provided for other regulatory controls. In this manner the Federal Government continued to exercise some degree of maritime safety supervision over the commercial and recreational vessel sector that was "uninspected". This was important because steam towing vessels were converting to diesel propulsion and were therefore no longer subject to the detailed periodic and extensive hull, machinery, and equipment inspections of a Federal agency. In addition, the number of recreational vessels primarily propelled by gasoline were increasing and were also suffering casualties from explosions and fires.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1990**—Pub. L. 101–595, title VI, §603(3)(B), Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2993, struck out item 4104 "Regulations".

**1984**—Pub. L. 98–364, title IV, §402(7)(B), July 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 446, inserted "GENERALLY" in chapter heading.
§ 27.10 Designation of a foreclosure commissioner. ( a ) When the Secretary determines that a multifamily mortgage should be foreclosed under the Act and this subpart, the General Counsel will select and designate one or more foreclosure commissioners to conduct the foreclosure and sale. The method of selection and determination of the qualifications of the foreclosure commissioner shall be at the discretion of the General Counsel, and the execution of a designation pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section shall be conclusive evidence that the commissioner selected has been determined to be qualified by the General Counsel.
( b ) After selection of a foreclosure commissioner, the General Counsel shall designate the commissioner in writing to conduct the foreclosure and sale of the particular multifamily mortgage. The written designation shall be duly acknowledged and shall state the name and business or residential address of the commissioner and any other information the General Counsel deems necessary. The designation shall be effective upon execution by the General Counsel or his designate. Upon receipt of the designation, the commissioner shall demonstrate acceptance by signing the designation and returning a signed copy to the General Counsel.
( c ) The General Counsel may at any time, with or without cause, designate a substitute commissioner to replace a previously designated commissioner. Designation of a substitute commissioner shall be in writing and shall contain the same information and be made effective in the same manner as the designation of the original commissioner. Upon designation of a substitute commissioner, the substitute commissioner shall serve a copy of the written notice of designation upon the persons listed at sections 369(1) (A) through (C) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 3708(1) (A) through (C)) either by mail, in accordance with section 369(1) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 3708(1)), except that the time limitations in that section will not apply, or by any other manner which in the substitute commissioner's discretion is conducive to giving timely notice of substitution.
### SUBCHAPTER VI—REGULATION OF VESSELS IN TERRITORIAL WATERS OF UNITED STATES
MANDATE

**Court of Appeals**

**First District of Texas**

NO. 01

- 1 4

- 00 48 9

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF K. P. M., K. S. M., AND K. W. M. , CHILD REN

Appeal from the 2 47 th District Court of Harris County (Tr. Ct. No. 20 07

- 23177 ).

TO THE 2 47 TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before this Court, on the 11 th day of December 201 4 , the cause upon appeal

to revise or to reverse your judgment was determined. This Court made its order in

these words:

The cause heard today by the Court is an appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on J u n e 1 7 , 201 4

. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised by the parties, and inspecting the record of the court below, it is the opinion of this Court that there is no reversible error in the judgment. Accordingly, the Court gra nts counsel’s motion to

withdraw. It is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED, and

ORDERED that the judgment of the court below be affirmed

.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

The Court further orders that th e mandate be iss ued immediately with the judgment

.

Judgment rendered December 11 , 201 4

.Per curiam opinion delivered by panel consisting of Justice s Keyes, Higley , and Brown

.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said

Court in this behalf and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and

executed.

February 20, 2015

Date CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK OF THE COURT
§ 573.9 Other requirements. ( a ) *Nondiscrimination and equal opportunity.* The nondiscrimination and equal opportunity requirements described in 24 CFR part 5, subpart A apply to this part.
( b ) *2 CFR part 200 .* The provisions of 2 CFR part 200 apply to guaranteed loans under this part.
( c ) *Lead-based paint.* Housing assisted under this part is subject to the lead-based paint requirements described in part 35, subparts A, B, E, G, and R of this title.
( d ) *Labor standards* — ( 1 ) *Davis-Bacon.* All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors in the performance of construction work financed in whole or in part with Guaranteed Loan Funds under this part shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on similar construction in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-5). This paragraph shall apply to the rehabilitation of residential property only if such property contains not less than 8 units.
( 2 ) *Volunteers.* The provisions of paragraph (d)(1) of this section shall not apply to volunteers under the conditions set forth in 24 CFR part 70. In applying part 70, loan guarantees under this part shall be treated as a program for which there is a statutory exemption for volunteers.
( 3 ) *Labor standards.* Any contract, subcontract, or building loan agreement executed for a project subject to Davis-Bacon wage rates under paragraph (d)(1) of this section shall comply with all labor standards and provisions of 29 CFR parts 1, 3 and 5 that would be applicable to a loan guarantee program to which Davis-Bacon wage rates are made applicable by statute.
[61 FR 47405, Sept. 6, 1996, as amended at 64 FR 50226, Sept. 15, 1999; 80 FR 75938, Dec. 7, 2015]
#### (A) The People of the State of New York v. Richard Butts. (B) Merle Lefkowitz v. Sheila Grosswald.

[In each action] Motion to dismiss appeal granted. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, McNally, Steuer and Stevens, JJ.
§ 906.45 HUD criteria for reviewing a proposed homeownership program. HUD will use the following criteria in reviewing a homeownership program: ( a ) *Feasibility.* The program must be practically feasible, with sound potential for long-term success. Financial viability, including the capability of purchasers to meet the financial obligations of homeownership, is a critical requirement.
( b ) *Legality.* Counsel for the PHA shall certify that the homeownership program is consistent with applicable law, including the requirements of this part and any other applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations, including existing contracts, and HUD shall accept such certification unless HUD has information indicating that the certification is incorrect.
( c ) *Documentation.* The program must be clear and complete enough to serve as a working document for implementation, as well as a basis for HUD review.
( d ) *PHA performance in homeownership.* The PHA (and any other entity with substantial responsibility for implementing the homeownership program) must have demonstrated the commitment and capability to successfully implement the homeownership program based upon the criteria stated in § 906.41(d).
### **CHAPTER 32A—COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL**

#### SUBCHAPTER I—PROGRAMS DOWNSTREAM FROM IMPERIAL DAM

Sec.
1571.
Water quality improvement.
1572.
Canal or canal lining.
1573.
Construction and maintenance of well fields; land acquisition; land replacement; nonreimbursable costs.
1574.
Modification of projects.
1575.
Contract authority.
1575a.
Administration and disposition of lands and constructed facilities; revenues credited to general fund of Treasury.
1576.
Interagency cooperation.
1577.
Existing Federal laws not modified.
1578.
Authorization of appropriations.
1579.
Fish and wildlife habitat; mitigation of losses.
1580.
Definitions.

#### SUBCHAPTER II—MEASURES UPSTREAM FROM IMPERIAL DAM

1591.
Salinity control policy.
1592.
Authorization to construct, operate, and maintain salinity control units and salinity control programs.
1593.
Planning reports; research and demonstration projects.
1594.
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council.
1595.
Salinity control units; authority and functions of Secretary of the Interior.
1596.
Biennial report to President, Congress, and Advisory Council.
1597.
Construction of provisions of subchapter.
1598.
Achieving project objectives.
1599.
Definitions.
NO. 07-04-0413-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

AUGUST 9, 2004

______________________________

In re GREGORIO SOTO, JR., 

Relator

_________________________________

Original Proceeding

_________________________________

 

Before JOHNSON, CJ., and QUINN and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Pending before this court is the petition of Gregorio Soto, Jr., for a writ of

mandamus. As we construe the document, he wishes us to order Greg Abbott (Texas

Attorney General), Ricky B. Smith (District Attorney of Garza County), and Jerry Hays

(District Clerk of Garza County) to provide him with copies of court records and unprivileged

documents so that he may seek a writ of habeas corpus. For the reasons which follow, we

deny the petition.

First, rules of procedure obligate one seeking mandamus relief to accompany his

petition with an appendix. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). The latter must include, among other

things, a “certified or sworn copy of . . . [the] document showing the matter complained of.”

In this case, the documents showing the matters complained of would at the very least be

copies of documents showing the relief that has been sought and a denial of the same.

Although relator refers to exhibits attached to his petition, we find none and there is no
2

record before us. Thus, relator not only failed to comply with the rules of appellate

procedure regulating mandamus, but also denied us a record sufficient to enable us to

assess his complaints.

Second, to the extent that relator wants us to order an entity other than a trial court

to act, we, as an appellate court, have jurisdiction to do so only when necessary to enforce

our jurisdiction over a pending appeal. In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding). At bar, however, Soto fails to allege that any

such appeal pends. Nor have we found an appeal involving Soto pending on our docket.

Furthermore, the Open Records Act, to which relator refers, does not grant original

jurisdiction to courts of appeal to issue writs of mandamus. Garner v. Gately, 909 S.W.2d

61, 62 (Tex. App.—Waco 1995, orig. proceeding). Thus, we have no jurisdiction over the

request for mandamus relief. 

Third, and to the extent that relator seeks a declaratory judgment, nothing of record

illustrates that the request either was presented to a trial court or that a trial court refused

to act upon it. One asking for mandamus relief must first show that the trial court was

asked to do something and that it refused the request. O’Connor v. First Court of Appeals,

837 S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tex. 1992). 

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

Brian Quinn 

 Justice
~156° 12°00" -156°09’ 900” ~156°06' 00” ~156°03' 00” ~156°090' 90”
20°00°

-157°00' 00"  -156°57/00" —-156°54’00" —--1S6°51’00" 15674800" = 156°45'00" 15624200" ~~ 156.3900" - 15673600" —-- 156 33’ 00” Is6°s0/n0"_-150827°00" _—-186"24" 00" = 15082100" = 156" 18 90" 156" 15/ an
20° 00’ 00” y 9 D> IF TREN

@l ‘9,

: CeO ee,

IS: Cg a

= q ==

19°57’ 00”

19°54’

19°54° 00”

ig¢si"

19°51‘ 00"

19° 48°

19° 48°00”

19° 45°

19°45’ 00"

19°42’

19°42’ 00”

19°39’

19°39' 00”

19° 36°

19°36’ 00”

19°33’

19°33’ 00"

OSE Zsa, : 9930"
48°00 156° 45 a0 -156°21' 90” -156° 18’ 00” 156°15‘ 00” -156° 12’ 00" ~156°09' 00" -156°906’ 90” -156°03' 00” ~156°00’ 00”
~156°54’ 00” -156°51'00" = ~156"48'00" = - 156° 45’ 00"
. INDIANAPOLIS SEAMOUNT N195156W

SCALE: 1:100,000
NOS MULTIBEAM SURVEYS
Contours in corrected meters.

LMi20
#### § 570.302 Submission requirements.

In order to receive its annual CDBG entitlement grant, a grantee must submit a consolidated plan in accordance with 24 CFR part 91. That part includes requirements for the content of the consolidated plan, for the process of developing the consolidated plan, including citizen participation provisions, for the submission date, for HUD approval, and for the amendment process.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2506-0117)

[60 FR 1915, Jan. 5, 1995]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS
ENDED MARCH 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         630,558
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,705,433
<ALLOWANCES>                                    23,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,230,316
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,585,735
<PP&E>                                         203,514
<DEPRECIATION>                                  24,692
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,774,908
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          478,507
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,326,484
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,030,083)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,774,908
<SALES>                                      1,694,592
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,694,592
<CGS>                                        1,313,210
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,313,210
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               441,973
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                10,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 903
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (57,426)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (57,426)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kareem Fauntleroy, Appellant.

[832 NYS2d 820]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated February 22, 1999 *(People v Fauntleroy,*258 AD2d 664 [1999]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered October 15, 1996.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Prudenti, P.J., Miller, Schmidt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of P & C Food Markets, Inc., Respondent, v. James F. Grant, as Health Officer of the City of Oswego, Appellant.

Order unanimously modified by striking therefrom the first and second ordering paragraphs thereof and by modifying the third ordering paragraph thereof to read as follows: *“*Ordered that, with respect to the application of the petitioner for a permit to distribute milk and milk products in said City of Oswego, obtained from the processing plants of Dairymen’s League Co-operative Association, Inc. and Byrne Dairy, Inc., both located at Syracuse, N. Y., the matter be, and the same hereby is remitted to the respondent for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum of this Court,” and as so modified the order is affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements to appellant. Memorandum: There must be affirmative action taken by local health officers who receive applications for local milk permits, in order to comply with section 258-j of the Agriculture and Markets Law. This section plays an important part in the plan of control and distribution of milk products within the State of New York. Its mandates should not be disregarded or eliminated by judicial interpretation. In order to fully *882comply with the section, health officers must forward to the Commissioner information tending either to satisfy him in regard to the three subjects involved or on the other hand, to indicate that the facts gathered are not such as would warrant his satisfaction. In either event the health officer must forward the information contemplated by the section to the Commissioner. The local health officer should have a reasonable time within which to assemble and forward the information, and upon receipt of the Commissioner’s indication of satisfaction or nonsatisfaction as to the three subjects, either grant or deny the application, providing of course that health and sanitation requirements are met. (Appeal from order of Oswego Special Term annulling the action of the Health Officer of Oswego, directing that a permit be issued to petitioner to distribute milk and milk products in Oswego obtained from the plant of Byrne Dairy, Inc., and remitting the application of petitioner for a permit to distribute milk, etc., obtained from the Dairymen’s League Co-op. Assn, for further proceedings.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
§ 3285.801 Exterior close-up. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 75758 , Sept. 16, 2024.
( a ) Exterior siding and roofing necessary to join all sections of the home must be installed according to the product manufacturer installation instructions and must be fastened in accordance with designs and manufacturer instructions, consistent with §§ 3280.305 and 3280.307 of this chapter. Exterior close-up strips/trim must be fastened securely and sealed with exterior sealant (see figure A to this section).
( b ) *Joints and seams.* All joints and seams in exterior wall coverings that were disturbed during location of the home must be made weatherproof.
( c ) Prior to installing the siding, the polyethylene sheeting covering exterior walls for transit must be completely removed.
( d ) Prior to completing the exterior close-up, any holes in the roofing must be made weatherproof and sealed with a sealant or other material that is suitable for use with the roofing in which the hole is made.
( e ) *Mate-line gasket.* The home manufacturer must provide materials and designs for mate-line gaskets or other methods designed to resist the entry of air, water, water vapor, insects, and rodents at all mate-line locations exposed to the exterior (see Figure B to this section).
( f ) *Hinged roofs and eaves.* Hinged roofs and eaves must be completed during installation in compliance with all requirements of the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (24 CFR part 3280) and the Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations (24 CFR part 3282). Unless exempted by the following provisions, hinged roofs are also subject to a final inspection for compliance with the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (24 CFR part 3280) by the IPIA or a qualified independent inspector acceptable to the IPIA. Homes with hinged roofs that are exempted from IPIA inspection are instead to be completed and inspected in accordance with the Manufactured Home Installation Program (24 CFR part 3286). This includes homes: ( 1 ) That are designed to be located in Wind Zone I;
( 2 ) In which the roof pitch of the hinged roof is less than 7:12, including designs incorporating peak cap construction or peak flip construction; and
( 3 ) In which fuel burning appliance flue penetrations are not above the hinge.
Notes:
1. Multi-section homes with horizontal-lap siding can be shipped with no siding on the front and rear end walls. 2. The manufacturer must install doors/windows trimmed with J-rail or the equivalent and protect all exposed materials not designed for exposure to the weather with plastic sheeting for transport. Siding, starter trim, and vents may be shipped loose in the home for installation on set-up. 3. All home installers must ensure that all field installed trim, windows, doors, and other openings are properly sealed according to the siding manufacturer installation instructions.
Note:
On multi-section manufactured homes, install the sealer gasket on the ceiling, end walls, and floor mate-line prior to joining the sections together.
[72 FR 59362, Oct. 19, 2007, as amended at 80 FR 53731, Sept. 8, 2015]