alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### 75 East End Owners, Inc., Appellant, v Jerome Prince et al., Respondents.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on June 20, 1977, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements, for the reasons stated by Helman, J., at Special Term. Concur— Birns, J. P., Evans, Fein, Lane and Sullivan, JJ.
#### In re HOPKINS’ WILL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 3, 1905.)

In the matter of the probate of the will of Robert E. Hopkins, deceased. No opinion. Motion for preference denied.
§ 965.502 Establishment of utility allowances by PHAs. ( a ) PHAs shall establish allowances for PHA-furnished utilities for all checkmetered utilities and allowances for resident-purchased utilities for all utilities purchased directly by residents from the utilities suppliers.
( b ) The PHA shall maintain a record that documents the basis on which allowances and scheduled surcharges, and revisions thereof, are established and revised. Such record shall be available for inspection by residents.
( c ) The PHA shall give notice to all residents of proposed allowances, scheduled surcharges, and revisions thereof. Such notice shall be given, in the manner provided in the lease or homebuyer agreement, not less than 60 days before the proposed effective date of the allowances or scheduled surcharges or revisions; shall describe with reasonable particularity the basis for determination of the allowances, scheduled surcharges, or revisions, including a statement of the specific items of equipment and function whose utility consumption requirements were included in determining the amounts of the allowances or scheduled surcharges; shall notify residents of the place where the PHA's record maintained in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section is available for inspection; and shall provide all residents an opportunity to submit written comments during a period expiring not less than 30 days before the proposed effective date of the allowances or scheduled surcharges or revisions. Such written comments shall be retained by the PHA and shall be available for inspection by residents.
( d ) Schedules of allowances and scheduled surcharges shall not be subject to approval by HUD before becoming effective, but will be reviewed in the course of audits or reviews of PHA operations.
( e ) The PHA's determinations of allowances, scheduled surcharges, and revisions thereof shall be final and valid unless found to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3242 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3242

        To extend the temporary suspension of duty on propanil.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 12, 2005

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To extend the temporary suspension of duty on propanil.

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

SECTION 1. PROPANIL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.02.89 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to propanamide, N-(3, 4-
dichloropheny 1)- is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting 
``12/31/2008''.
    (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 the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

JOSE ANTONIO TORRES, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-3878 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed March 21, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Hardee County; Marcus J. Ezell, Judge. Jose Antonio Torres, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
VILLANTI, KHOUZAM, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following
Registration Statements:



|(1) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-130480) of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc.,
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-129258) of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc., and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(3) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-122088) pertaining to the securities to be offered to employees under the Long Term Incentive Plan of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc.;
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated February 5, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc. and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc. included in this amended Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007.

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG
LLP

Irvine, California

February 19, 2008
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 

 1 

[Proposed] Order (Richardson v. Cate, et al. - C 09-2227 WHA) 

 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

ALVIN RICHARDSON, 

Petitioner,

v. 

MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of the 

California Department of Corrections and 

Rehabilitation, JOHN MARSHALL, 

Warden California Men's Colony, 

Respondent.

Case No. C 09-2227 WHA 

[PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 

TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE 

ANSWER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF 

HABEAS CORPUS 

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that the time within which respondent is 

to answer the petition for writ of habeas corpus and provide the relevant state record shall be 

extended 50 days, to and including September 30, 2010. 

Dated: ___________________________ ________________________ 

 The Honorable William Alsup 

 United States District Judge

August 4, 2010.

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge William Alsup

Case 3:09-cv-02227-WHA Document 19 Filed 08/04/10 Page 1 of 1
### §386. Forfeitures

The following forfeitures shall apply to this part in addition to penalties and forfeitures provided by subchapter V of this chapter:

(a) Any vessel of the United States that is navigated in violation of the provisions of this part or of the rules and regulations of the Commission made in pursuance thereof shall forfeit to the United States the sum of $5,000 recoverable by way of suit or libel. Each day during which such navigation occurs shall constitute a separate offense.

(b) Every willful failure on the part of the master of a vessel of the United States to enforce or to comply with the provisions of this part or the rules and regulations of the Commission made in pursuance thereof shall cause him to forfeit to the United States the sum of $1,000.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title III, §386, as added Aug. 6, 1956, ch. 973, §1, 70 Stat. 1048; amended Pub. L. 101–239, title III, §3002(h), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2131; Pub. L. 103–414, title III, §303(a)(20)(F), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4295.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–414 inserted section catchline.

1989—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–239, §3002(h)(1), substituted "$5,000" for "$500".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–239, §3002(h)(2), substituted "$1,000" for "$100".

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Mar. 1, 1957, see section 4 of act Aug. 6, 1956, set out as a note under section 381 of this title.
#### S. C. Andrews *vs.*Town of Marion.

February 13, 1877.

Appeal from Order Laying Out Road — Notice.—Under Laws 1873, c. 5, relating to roads, cartways, and bridges, a notice of appeal to the district court, from an order laying out a road and assessing damages, need not state that the party-appealing has filed the application and bond required by the act to perfect the appeal.

Same — Costs of Appeal. — The act does not allow costs to the successful party on an appeal from the order of the commissioners or supervisors to the district court.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Olmsted county, where the action was tried before *Mitchell,*J., and a jury. The defendant objected, before the clerk of the district court, to the taxation of any costs against it, but the costs were taxed by the clerk and inserted iu the judgment, and, on appeal to the court, the clerk’s taxation was affirmed.

*Charles C. Willson,*for appellant.

*Start & Gove,*for respondent.

Gilfillan, C. J.

This case came into the district court by appeal, tty this plaintiff, from the order of the supervisors of the town of Marion, laying out a road over the land of plaintiff, and .assessing her damages therefor under Laws 1873, c. 5. A motion was made by the town, in the district court, to dismiss the appeal oil the ground that the notice of appeal merely stated that the party had appealed, and thereby appealed, from the order, (describing it,) to the district couit, without stating the other acts necessary to be done to make an appeal, to wit, the filing of an application and bond as prescribed by the act. The motion w;.-.$ denied correctly. Notice that a party has appealed is, unless the statute requires further specification, in effect, notice that the party has done whatever was necessary to make the appeal effectual.

On the trial in-the district court the damages were largely *373increased, and the court below allowed the appellant there the costs of the appeal, which were entered in the judgment. In this we think the court below was wrong. The proceeding, even on appeal, is not a civil action, so as to be governed by the statute prescribing costs in such action. It is a special proceeding, controlled by the statute establishing it. This act, sections 60 and 61, provides for costs on an appeal to a justice of the peace, but section 62, which relates to appeals to the district court, is entirely silent on the subject of costs ; and as it does not provide for costs on such appeal, none can be recovered. It is undoubtedly a defect in the statute, but the court cannot supply the omission. The judgment must be modified by deducting the amount allowed for costs, and the case will be remanded for that purpose.
### §8906. Penalty

An owner, charterer, managing operator, agent, master, or individual in charge of a vessel operated in violation of this chapter or a regulation prescribed under this chapter is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $25,000. The vessel also is liable in rem for the penalty.

(Pub. L. 98–89, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 556; Pub. L. 104–324, title III, §306(b), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3918.)

| Revised section | Source section (U.S. Code) |
| --- | --- |
| 8906 | 46:390d |

Section 8906 prescribes the penalties for violations of this chapter.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–324 substituted "not more than $25,000" for "$1,000".
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KEVIN M. JONES; CHERYL A. JONES,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v. CITIMORTGAGE INC., a business entity; CAL

- WESTERN RECONVEYANCE CORPORATION, a business entity,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 13

- 15976
D.C. No. 1:12

- cv - 02067

- LJO

- SMS

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence J. O'Neill, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 10, 2015 ** San Francisco, California Before: SILVERMAN, GOULD, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Kevin and Cheryl Jones appeal the district court’s dismissal of their first amended complaint (“FAC”) against CitiMortgage, Inc. (“Citi”), and Cal

- Western

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 12 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

Reconveyance Corp oration, asserting various claims arising out of a home loan modification. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and affirm.

1. The FAC did not state claims for either fraud or negligent misrepresentation because it did not plausibly allege that C iti materially misrepresented the monthly payment due under the modification agreement or that the plaintiffs justifiably relied on any misrepresentation. See Davis v. HSBC Bank Nev., N.A. , 691 F.3d 1152, 1163 (9th Cir. 2012); Fox v. Pollack , 226 Cal. Rpt r. 532, 537 (Ct. App. 1986).

2. The FAC did not state a claim under the California Unfair Competitio n Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. , because it failed to plausibly allege that Citi violated any other laws, see Levitt v. Yelp! Inc. , 765 F.3d 1123, 1130 (9th Cir. 2014), or engaged in fraudulent or unfair business practices, see Davis , 691 F.3d
at 1169

- 70; Cel

- Tech Comms., Inc. v. L.A. Cellular Tel. Co. , 973 P.2d 527, 544 (Cal. 1999)

.
3. The district court did not abuse its discretio n in denying leave to file a second amended complaint after concluding further amendment would be futile.
See Allen v. City of Beverly Hills , 911 F.2d 367, 373

- 74 (9th Cir. 1990).

AFFIRMED.
#### § 92.150 Submission requirements.

In order to receive its HOME allocation, a participating jurisdiction must submit a consolidated plan in accordance with 24 CFR part 91. That part includes requirements for the content of the consolidated plan, the process of developing the consolidated plan, including citizen participation, the submission date, HUD approval, and amendments.
#### Armando Martino et al., Respondents, v. Sam Cohen, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

In an action to recover damages for injury to person and property, defendant Cohen appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 20, 1960, granting plaintiffs’ motion, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, for summary judgment against said defendant, directing an assessment of damages against him, and severing the action as against the other defendants. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. The record shows the existence of issues of fact which should be determined after trial, not on a motion for summary judgment. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest Service 

Petersburg Ranger 

District 

Tongass 

National 

Forest 

R10-MB-629b 

December 2008 

Central 

Kupreanof 

Timber Harvest

Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement 

Volume B, Appendices 
Abbreviations and Common 

Acronyms 

ANILCA Alaska National Interest 

Lands Conservation Act 

ASQ Allowable Sale Quantity 

BMPs Best Management 

Practices 

CCF Hundred Cubic Feet 

CEQ Council on Environmental 

Quality 

DBH Diameter at Breast Height 

DEIS Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement 

EFH Essential Fish Habitat 

FEIS Final Environmental 

Impact Statement 

Forest Plan Tongass Land and 

Resource Management 

Plan 2008 

GIS Geographic Information 

System 

HSI Habitat Suitability Index 

IDT Interdisciplinary Team 

LTF Log Transfer Facility 

LUD Land Use Designation 

MBF Thousand Board Feet 

MIS Management Indicator 

Species 

MMBF Million Board Feet 

MMI Mass Movement Index 

NEAT_R NEPA Economic 

Analysis Tool 

NEPA National Environmental 

Policy Act 

NFMA National Forest 

Management Act 

NFS National Forest System 

POG Productive Old Growth 

RMA Riparian Management 

Area 

RMO Road Management 

Objective 

ROS Recreation Opportunity 

Spectrum 

SHPO State Historic 

Preservation Office 

VCU Value Comparison Unit 

WAA Wildlife Analysis Area
§ 906.15 Requirements applicable to a family purchasing a property under a homeownership program. ( a ) *Low-income requirement.* Except in the case of a PHA's offer of first refusal to a resident occupying the unit under § 906.13, a family purchasing a property under a PHA homeownership program must be a low-income family, as defined in section 3 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437a), at the time the contract to purchase the property is executed.
( b ) *Principal residence requirement.* The dwelling unit sold to an eligible family must be used as the principal residence of the family.
( c ) *Financial capacity requirement.* Eligibility must be limited to families who are capable of assuming the financial obligations of homeownership, under minimum income standards for affordability, taking into account the unavailability of public housing operating subsidies and modernization funds after conveyance of the property by the PHA. A homeownership program may, however, take account of any available subsidy from other sources. Under this affordability standard, an applicant must meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) *Cost/income ratio.* On an average monthly estimate, the amount of the applicant's payments for mortgage principal and interest, plus insurance, real estate taxes, utilities, maintenance, and other regularly recurring homeownership costs (such as condominium, cooperative, or other homeownership association fees) will not exceed the sum of: ( i ) 35 percent of the applicant's adjusted income as defined in 24 CFR part 913; and
( ii ) Any subsidy that will be available for such payments;
( 2 ) *Down payment requirement.* Each family purchasing housing under a homeownership program must provide a down payment in connection with any loan for acquisition of the housing, in an amount determined by the PHA or PRE, in accordance with an approved homeownership program. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the PHA or PRE must permit the family to use grant amounts, gifts from relatives, contributions from private sources, and other similar amounts in making the down payment;
( 3 ) The family must use its own resources other than grants, gifts, contributions, or similar amounts, to contribute an amount of the down payment that is not less than one percent of the purchase price of the housing. The PHA or PRE must maintain records that are verifiable by HUD through audits regarding the source of this one percent contribution.
( d ) *Other requirements established by the PHA.* A PHA may establish requirements or limitations for families to purchase housing under a homeownership program, including but not limited to requirements or limitations regarding: ( 1 ) Employment or participation in employment counseling or training activities;
( 2 ) Criminal activity;
( 3 ) Participation in homeownership counseling programs; and
( 4 ) Evidence of regular income.
**EXHIBIT 99.4**

**News Release****August 4, 2000**

**Trading Symbols:**TRBD (EASDAQ)

**TURBODYNE ANNOUNCES SUSPENSION OF TRADING ON EASDAQ**

**Carpinteria, CA—August 4, 2000**—Turbodyne Technologies Inc. (EASDAQ: TRBD) today announced that effective August 2, 2000, Easdaq has suspended trading of Turbodyne shares pending a further review by Easdaq ofthe facts underlying Turbodyne’s press release of August 1, 2000. That release reported on the Company’s working capital position and the Company’s investigation into prior management’s issuance in 1999 of approximately 8.7 million shares of Common Stock. Turbodyne is in contact with Easdaq regarding this review and will provide further information concerning the status of trading on Easdaq as this information becomes available to the Company.

Turbodyne Technologies Inc., a California based high technology company, specializes in the development of charging technology for internal combustion engines and the development and manufacturing of high-tech assemblies forelectrically assisted turbochargers and superchargers. Turbodyne Technologies Inc.’s headquarters is located in Carpinteria, California, and its European office is located in Frankfurt, Germany. 

Contacts:

Kenneth Fitzpatrick—Investor Relations at California Headquarters: (800) 566-1130Markus Kumbrink—Investor Relations at Frankfurt office: +49-69-69-76-73-13Peter Weichselbraun—Media Contact at CaliforniaHeadquarters: (800) 566-1130

This release contains forward-looking statements as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including statements about future business operations, financial performance and market conditions. Suchforward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties inherent in business forecasts.

****
Docket No. FAA-2012-1038
§ 983.252 PHA information for accepted family. ( a ) *Oral briefing.* When a family accepts an offer of PBV assistance, the PHA must give the family an oral briefing. ( 1 ) The briefing must include information on the following subjects: ( i ) A description of how the program works;
( ii ) Family and owner responsibilities; and
( iii ) Family right to move.
( 2 ) The PHA must take appropriate steps to ensure effective communication in accordance with 24 CFR 8.6 and 28 CFR part 35, subpart E, and must provide information on the reasonable accommodation process.
( b ) *Information packet.* The PHA must give the family a packet that includes information on the following subjects: ( 1 ) How the PHA determines the total tenant payment for a family;
( 2 ) Family obligations under the program; and
( 3 ) Information on Federal, State, and local equal opportunity laws, the contact information for the Section 504 coordinator, a copy of the housing discrimination complaint form, and information on how to request a reasonable accommodation or modification under Section 504, the Fair Housing Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act;
( 4 ) PHA subsidy standards, including when the PHA will consider granting exceptions to the standards as allowed by 24 CFR 982.402(b)(8), and when exceptions are required as a reasonable accommodation for a person with disabilities under Section 504, the Fair Housing Act, or the Americans with Disabilities Act; and
( 5 ) Family right to move.
( c ) *Statement of family responsibility.* The PHA and family must sign the statement of family responsibility.
( d ) *Providing information for persons with limited English proficiency.* The PHA must take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access by persons with limited English proficiency in accordance with obligations and procedures contained in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and HUD's implementing regulation at 24 CFR part 1., Executive Order 13166, and HUD's *Final Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons* (72 FR 2732) or successor authority.
[89 FR 38333, May 7, 2024]