alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 35.2
            SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)
                               GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC
        RAMP SERIES 2006-RZ4 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized  officer of GMAC Mortgage,  LLC, as servicer
(the "Servicer")  pursuant to the applicable  servicing  agreement,  does hereby
certify that:

1.   A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during the  period  covered by the
     Issuing  Entity's  report  on Form 10-K and of the  Servicer's  performance
     under  the   applicable   servicing   agreement  has  been  made  under  my
     supervision.

2.   To the  best of my  knowledge,  based  on such  review,  the  Servicer  has
     fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable  servicing  agreement
     in all material respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:      /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      -------------------------
      Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
      Title:    Executive Vice President
J

- S22022

- 16

NON

- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

– SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Appellee

v.

FORREST ALLISON GRIBBLE,

Appellant :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 1394 MDA 2015

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence July 30 , 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County Criminal Division, at No(s): CP

- 14

- CR

- 0001040

- 2013

BEFORE: MUNDY, J., DUBOW, J., and STRASSBURGER, JJ.*

DISSENTING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.: FILED MAY 13, 2016

I respectfully dissent.

The record before us reveals that Appellant preserved only a claim that

the motion to revoke was untimely filed because he had completed his ARD

program before the Commonwealth filed its motion to revoke. 1 Appellant’s

issue on appeal that the Commonwealth failed to file its motion wi thin a

reasonable time as prescribed by Pa.R.Crim.P. 318 does not appear within

the contents of the certified record received by this Court. 2

, 3 “[T]his Court

1 See Order of Court, 11/5/2014 (granting the motion to revoke Appellant’s ARD despite the fact that Appellant received notice prior to the motion that he had “fulfilled all of the conditions” of the program.).

2 Both the trial court and the Commonweal th acknowledge that, following the filing of the motion to revoke Appellant’s ARD, argument was held and the motion was granted. There is no transcript of this proceeding in the certified record nor is there an explanation for its absence. See Pa.R.A.P. 1923 (“ If no report of the evidence or proceedings at a hearing or trial wasJ

- S22022

- 16

- 2

-

cannot review a legal theory in support of that claim unless that particular

legal theory was pre sented to the trial court.” Commonwealth v. Lincoln

,

72 A.3d 606, 610 (Pa. Super. 2013) (quoting Commonwealth v. Rush

,

959 A.2d 945, 949 (Pa. Super. 2008)).

For this reason I would deem Appellant’s issue waived and would

affirm his judgment of sentence.

made, or if a transcript is unavailable, the appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means, including his recollection.”).

3 At A ppellant’s stipulated non

- jury trial, defense counsel stated “We are having a non

- jury trial to preserve the issue ... regarding [Appellant’s] ARD revocation. ... Our position is that the Commonwealth’s petition to revoke his ARD was untimely filed and it was an error of law to subsequently revoke him.” N.T., 5/11/2015, at 3. This bald assertion, without any accompanying argument regarding Pa.R.Crim.P. 318, is not enough to inform this Court if Appellant properly preserved this issue by raising it with the tr ial court

below.
#### Diane F., Respondent, v State of New York, Appellant.

[813 NYS2d 913]

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Lack, J.), dated December 1, 2004, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the claim is dismissed.

*733The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by tendering evidence that it did not breach any duty owed to the claimant *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; *Ayeni v County of Nassau,*18 AD3d 409, 410 [2005]). In opposition, the claimant failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]; *Adams v State of New York,*210 AD2d 273, 274 [1994]; *cf. Miller v State of New York,*62 NY2d 506, 514 [1984]). Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim should have been granted. Schmidt, J.P., Crane, Santucci and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                            1160
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  3108
<PP&E>                                           73063
<DEPRECIATION>                                   25666
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   51581
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            13763
<BONDS>                                          53575
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (16899)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     51581
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9728
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5065
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1571
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4321
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1229)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1229)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1229)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (14.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (14.49)
        

</TABLE>
#### § 600.4 State offices.

Each office is under the direction and supervision of a State conservationist. Each State conservationist is responsible for NRCS programs in a State. The Pacific Basin Area Office, under the direction and supervision of a director, serves the U.S. Trust Territories in that area. The Caribbean Area Office, under the direction and supervision of a director, serves the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Directors of the Pacific Basin and Caribbean areas have the same responsibility and authority as a State conservationist. All references to State conservationists in this chapter include the directors of the Pacific Basin and Caribbean areas.
#### § 53.11 Withdrawal of application or request for service.

An application or a request for service under the regulations may be withdrawn by the applicant at any time before the application is approved or prior to performance of service, upon payment, in accordance with §§ 53.18 and 53.19, of any expenses already incurred by the Agricultural Marketing Service in connection therewith.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          47,002
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  182,920
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     10,771
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               257,540
<PP&E>                                         888,961
<DEPRECIATION>                              (1,054,014)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,920,370
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          859,813
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,185
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,041,372
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,060,557
<SALES>                                        274,277
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               466,911
<CGS>                                          326,271
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  326,271
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,789
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (218,585)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (218,585)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (218,585)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.01)
        

</TABLE>
22.201 General.

(a) Executive Order11755, December 29,1973, as amended by Executive Order12608, September

9,1987, and Executive Order12943, December 13,1994, states: "The development of the

occupational and educational skills of prison inmates is essential to their rehabilitation and to their

ability to make an effective return to free society. Meaningful employment serves to develop those

skills. It is also true, however, that care must be exercised to avoid either the exploitation of convict

labor or any unfair competition between convict labor and free labor in the production of goods and

services." The Executive order does not prohibit the contractor, in performing the contract, from

employing-

(1) Persons on parole or probation;

(2) Persons who have been pardoned or who have served their terms;

(3) Federal prisoners; or

(4) Nonfederal prisoners authorized to work at paid employment in the community under the laws of

a jurisdiction listed in the Executive order if-

(i) The worker is paid or is in an approved work training program on a voluntary basis;

(ii) Representatives of local union central bodies or similar labor union organizations have been

consulted;

(iii) Paid employment will not-

(A) Result in the displacement of employed workers;

(B) Be applied in skills, crafts, or trades in which there is a surplus of available gainful labor in the

locality; or

(C) Impair existing contracts for services;

(iv) The rates of pay and other conditions of employment will not be less than those for work of a

similar nature in the locality where the work is being performed; and

(v) The Attorney General of the United States has certified that the work-release laws or regulations

of the jurisdiction involved are in conformity with the requirements of Executive Order11755, as

amended.

(b) Department of Justice regulations authorize the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance to

exercise the power and authority vested in the Attorney General by the Executive order to certify

and to revoke the certification of work-release laws or regulations (see 28 CFR0.94-1(b)).

Parent topic: Subpart 22.2 - Convict Labor
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. Case No: 3:03cr150/RV

3:06cv226/RV/MD

BRADFORD SAMUEL POTTS

_____________________________________________________________________

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's report and

recommendation dated April 27, 2007. The defendant previously has been furnished

a copy of the report and recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to

file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), and I have

made a de novo determination of those portions to which an objection has been

made.

Having considered the report and recommendation and all objections thereto

timely filed by the parties, I have determined that the report and recommendation

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The defendant’s second amended motion to vacate, set aside or correct

sentence (doc. 126) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of June, 2007.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:03-cr-00150-RV Document 155 Filed 06/05/07 Page 1 of 1
52.214-29 Order of Precedence-Sealed

Bidding.

As prescribed in 14.201-7(d), insert the following clause:

Order of Precedence-Sealed Bidding (Jan 1986)

Any inconsistency in this solicitation or contract shall be resolved by giving precedence in the

following order:

(a) The Schedule (excluding the specifications);

(b) Representations and other instructions;

(c) Contract clauses;

(d) Other documents, exhibits, and attachments; and

(e) The specifications.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.214 [Reserved]
(50 Misc. Rep. 672.)

#### In re BLAKE’S ESTATE.

(Surrogate’s Court, Kings County.

May, 1906.)

Wills—Partial Intestacy.

Testator devised certain property in trust during the lifetime of his wife. Upon the death of the wife the property was to be sold by his executors, who were given power of sale for that purpose, and from the proceeds of the sale $500 was directed to be given to testator’s son, with a proviso that, in the event of his death, the same should be held in trust. There was no provision made, however, for the distribution of the balance of the proceeds of the sale. *Meld,*that as to such balance testator is to be presumed to have died intestate, and that the same should be distributed in accordance with the statute.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 49, Cent. Dig. Wills, § 965; vol. 16, Cent. Dig. Descent and Distribution, § 123.]

*628Proceedings upon the final accounting of the executors of John A. Blake, deceased.

John A. Holzapfel, for accounting executors.

George M. Schuzel, for Emma and Maud Blake.

Joseph J. Hood, special guardian.

CHURCH, S.

Under the will in question the property on Lynch street was given in trust during the term of the lifetime of testator’s wife Esther. By the fifth paragraph of the will there was a provision, however, authorizing the sale of said house during the wife’s lifetime, and providing for the division of the proceeds upon such sale. It is unnecessary to construe the effect of this provision, as it appears that such house was not sold in pursuance thereto.

By the sixth paragraph of the will, upon the death of his wife the said house and lot was to be sold by his executors, who were given power of sale to accomplish this result. From the proceeds of said sale $500 was directed to be given to the testator’s son John, with the proviso that, in the event of his death, the same should be held ini trust. Said son John is living, and therefore entitled to such sum of money. There is no provision made, however, for the distribution of the balance of the proceeds of such sale, and consequently the testator as to such amount is to be presumed to have died intestate, and the same should be distributed in accordance with the statute. Let decree provide accordingly.

Decreed accordingly.
22.202 Contract clause.       Insert the clause at 52.222-3, Convict Labor,	in solicitations and contracts above the micro-purchase threshold,	when the contract will be performed in the United States, Puerto	Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, or the	U.S. Virgin Islands; unless-                                       (a) 						            The	contract will be subject to 41 U.S.C. chapter 65, (see subpart  22.6), which	contains a separate prohibition against the employment of convict	labor;                                          (b) 						            The supplies	or services are to be purchased from Federal Prison Industries,	Inc. (see subpart  8.6); or                                          (c) 						            The acquisition	involves the purchase, from any State prison, of finished supplies	that may be secured in the open market or from existing stocks,	as distinguished from supplies requiring special fabrication.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 22.2 - Convict Labor
#### § 3801.1 General.

This part is issued in accordance with the regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture in §§ 1.1-1.23 of this title and Appendix A thereto, implementing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), and governs the availability of records of the World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB) to the public.
#### Edwin A. Logue, Appellant, v. Hyman D. Kacholsky, Respondent.

Judgment (misnomered an order) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 6, 1968, affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. No opinion. Brennan, Acting -P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
Form of Letter to Messrs. Michael Descheneaux and Dave Webb re: salary increases



 Exhibit 10.31 
 May [__], 2009 
  

	RE:	Incremental Increase to Annual Base Salary 

 Dear
[            ]: 
 As you are aware, the recent enactment of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “ARRA”) imposes certain executive compensation restrictions on companies participating in the Capital Purchase Program (“CPP”), including restrictions on bonuses, retention awards and incentive
compensation to the top five most highly-compensated executives (“Top Five”). Based on your 2008 compensation, you are one of our Top Five, and as such, we are currently restricted from accruing or paying incentive compensation for you.

 The Board’s Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) remains committed to our overall compensation philosophy, however, in light of the
ARRA’s restrictions, we are making some adjustments to make sure that we appropriately reward and retain you. To this end, the Committee has approved a total annual base salary for you of
[$            ], consisting of your current annual base salary of [$            ] (your “Current Salary”)
plus an increase of [$            ] (“Incremental Increase”), to be paid in semi-monthly installments in accordance with our standard payroll practices. The Incremental
Increase in salary will become effective as of May 1, 2009. 
 The Committee continues to believe that the Company’s historical approach to
executive compensation, as described in the Company’s Compensation Discussion and Analysis in its 2009 Proxy Statement, remains sound. Thus, the Committee anticipates that it will adjust your base salary downward in the future, and will resume
its practice of using a mix of base salary and incentive compensation that appropriately ties total compensation and Company performance, as and when it is permitted to do so under the ARRA and other applicable laws and regulations. 
 Further, please note that due to the nature of the Incremental Increase, any merit salary increase is expected to be based only on your Current Salary, as adjusted for
any merit increases determined by the Committee. Furthermore, to the extent you are later eligible to receive incentive compensation for any given year, the Committee may, at its discretion, take into consideration the Incremental Increase already
received by you for that year to offset any incentive compensation payments. 







 Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to discuss them with Chris Edmonds-Waters or me.

  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	SVB Financial Group
	
	  
	 Ken Wilcox
 President and Chief Executive
Officer
# 42.903 Solicitation provision and contract clause.

The *contracting officer**shall* insert the clause at 52.242-13, Bankruptcy, in all *solicitations* and contracts exceeding the *simplified acquisition threshold*.

**Parent topic:**Subpart 42.9 - Bankruptcy
#### § 51.890 One variety.

*One variety* means that the grapes show similar varietal characteristics.

[36 FR 9126, May 20, 1971. Redesignated at 42 FR 32514, June 27, 1977, and further redesignated at 46 FR 63203, Dec. 31, 1981. Redesignated at 56 FR 15802, Apr. 18, 1991]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

EMERALD COAST RESTAURANTS 

INC,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:20-cv-5898-TKW/HTC

ASPEN SPECIALTY INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

JUDGMENT

This action came before the Court with the Honorable T. Kent Wetherell, II

presiding. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

¶ Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 10) is GRANTED and the amended 

complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.

JESSICA J. LYUBLANOVITS,

CLERK OF COURT

December 18, 2020 s/ Jeremy Wright

DATE Deputy Clerk

Case 3:20-cv-05898-TKW-HTC Document 21 Filed 12/18/20 Page 1 of 1
32.002 Applicability of subparts.

(a) The following sections and subparts of this part are applicable to all purchases subject to part 

32:

(1) Sections 32.000 through 32.009.

(2) subpart 32.3, Loan Guarantees for Defense Production.

(3) subpart 32.6, Contract Debts.

(4) subpart 32.7, Contract Funding.

(5) subpart 32.8, Assignment of Claims.

(6) subpart 32.9, Prompt Payment.

(7) subpart 32.11, Electronic Funds Transfer.

(b) subpart 32.2, Commercial Product and Commercial Service Purchase Financing, is applicable

only to purchases of commercial products and commercial services under authority of part 12.

(c) The following subparts of this part are applicable to all purchases made under any authority

other than part 12:

(1) subpart 32.1, Financing for Other Than a Commercial Purchase.

(2) subpart 32.4, Advance Payments for Other Than Commercial Acquisitions.

(3) subpart 32.5, Progress Payments Based on Costs.

(4) subpart 32.10, Performance-Based Payments.

Parent topic: Part 32 - Contract Financing
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO.: 5:98cr8/LAC 

5:06cv19/LAC/MD

CARLOS DEGLACE

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate

Judge filed on January 20, 2006, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and after

reviewing objections to the Recommendation, if any, the Recommendation is

adopted as the opinion of the Court.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

The motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

2255 (doc. 433) is summarily DISMISSED as successive.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of February, 2006.

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:98-cr-00008-LC-MD Document 436 Filed 02/23/06 Page 1 of 1