alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31**

** **

**LONG BEACH SECURITIES CORP.**

** **

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

 

I, Douglas A. Potolsky, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10–K and all reports on Form 10–D required to befiled in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10–K of Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-9 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain anyuntrue statement of a  material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to beprovided under Form 10–D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.             Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material respects; and

 

5.             All of the reports on assessment of compliance with Servicing Criteria for asset-backedsecurities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with Servicing Criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a–18 and 15d–18have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10–K. 

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:  Deutsche BankNational Trust Company.

 

Dated:  March 15, 2007

 

LONG BEACH SECURITIES CORP.

 

 

By:   /s/ Douglas A. Potolsky  _______Name:  Douglas A. PotolskyTitle:    Senior Vice President
#### TEETER v. DANIEL.

(No. 5793.)

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 10, 1914.)

Jury (§ 25*)—Right to Trial by Jury—Waiver of Right.

Under rule 31 of the General Rules of Practice, providing that a jury is waived unless the party entitled thereto give notice of motion within 20 days after issues are joined, a motion for a jury in an equity case, made in the year 1914, where the case was at issue in 1907, was properly denied.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Jury, Cent. Dig. §§ 154-173; Dec. Dig. § 25.*]

Appeal from Special Term-, New York County.

Action by Sydney M. Teeter against Anna K. Daniel. From an order denying his motion to frame issues for trial before a jury, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

See, also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1145.

Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and CLARKE, SCOTT, DOWLING, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.

Anna K. Daniel, of New York City, pro se.

Isaac Heller, of New York City, for respondent.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

PER CURIAM.

This action was brought to restrain the defendant from bringing actions and filing lis pendenses to vacate a final judgment of foreclosure and sale which had been executed by a sale of the premises. The action seems to have been at issue by the service of an answer which was verified on the 29th of June, 1907. When the action came on for trial at the Special Term, the defendant, on the 20th of February, 1914, obtained an order to show cause why issues should not be framed for trial before a jury. That motion was denied on the 3d day of March, 1914, by the order appealed from, which denied the motion without prejudice to an application before the Special Term of the Supreme Court where the action had been called for trial.

By rule 31 of the General Rules of Practice it is provided:

> “In all actions where either party is entitled to have an issue or issues of fact settled for trial by a jury, either as a matter of right or by leave of the court if either party desires such a trial, the party must within twenty days after issue joined, give notice of motion that all the issues or one or more specific issues be so tried. If such -motion is not made within such time, the right to a trial by jury is waived.”

This motion did not comply with this provision of the rule. The action was an action in equity to which neither party was entitled as a matter of right to a trial by jury, and it therefore is clear that the court below was justified in denying the motion.

The order appealed from must therefore be affirmed, without costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S DECEMBER 31, 1995 FORM 10-Q AND THRIFT FINANCIAL REPORT IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          36,991
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 4,335
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    211,628
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        730,626
<ALLOWANCE>                                      9,429
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,037,998
<DEPOSITS>                                     817,289
<SHORT-TERM>                                    94,848
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             22,857
<LONG-TERM>                                     20,556
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,564
<COMMON>                                         7,034
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,850
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,037,998
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 16,698
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,892
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                20,590
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               9,390
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,395
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            9,195
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      627
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 (7)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  7,397
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,913
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,611
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,611
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.87
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,386
<LOANS-PAST>                                       993
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 9,917
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 9,186
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      769
<RECOVERIES>                                       385
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                9,429
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             7,212
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,217
        

</TABLE>
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO.: 4:01cr47-SPM

WILLIE JAMES FRANCIS,

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion for

reconsideration (doc. 250). Upon review, the Court stands by its previous ruling

that Defendant is not eligible for a sentence reduction under (Amendment 750

and 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) because application of the amendment does not lower

Defendant’s sentencing range, which was determined by the mandatory

minimum. See United States v. Williams, 549 F.3d 1337 (11th Cir. 2008) (a 5k1

downward departure does not result in the removal of the mandatory minimum

when determining eligibility for a reduction under § 3582(c)) ; United States v.

Gomes, 621 F.3d 1343, 1346 (11th Cir. 2011) (Fair Sentencing Act’s changes to

drug amounts triggering statutory minimum mandatory sentences do not apply 
Page 2 of 2

retroactively to defendants who were sentenced before its enactment). 

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: Defendant’s motion for reconsideration

(doc. 250) is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of January, 2012.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Senior United States District Judge

CASE NO.: 4:01cr47-SPM
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO: 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW-8

)

(DEMETRIA MILLS) )

)

CECILLO PACACHE, et. al. )

MOTION TO DISMISS HEARING

COMES NOW the Defendant, Demetria Mills, through her undersigned counsel, and moves

to dismiss the Conditions on Bond Hearing set January 4, 2008 at 9:00 A.M. 

Ms. Mills has tested positive for marijuana while on bond. Ms. Mills is set to be sentenced

at the end of January. She was entering drug rehabilitation at the time of testing positive for

marijuana. She had tested negative numerous times while on bond. She understands that she violated

her conditions on bond. She is remorseful for her actions and requests another chance to complete

drug rehabilitation. Counsel also has discussed this matter with the U.S. Probation Office and with

the Assistant U.S. Attorney in this case.

Dated this January 2, 2008. 

Respectfully submitted,

s/Everett M. Urech 

EVERETT M. URECH

AL BAR NO.: ASB-6693-E44E

Attorney for Defendant

Urech & Livaudais, P.C.

510 N. Daleville Ave or P.O. Drawer 70

Daleville, AL 36322

TEL: (334) 598-4455 FAX: (334) 598-2076

E-Mail: daleattyeu@graceba.net

Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 482 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 2, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing with the

Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to

the following: United States Attorney - Criminal Division (A. Clark Morris and John T. Harmon)

Montgomery, Alabama 36104.

s/Everett M. Urech 

EVERETT M. URECH

Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 482 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 2 of 2
AO 91 (Rev. 11/11) Criminal Complaint

United States of America )

)

)

)

)

)

)

v.

Case No.

Defendant(s)

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

Code Section Offense Description

This criminal complaint is based on these facts: 

u Continued on the attached sheet.

Printed name and title

Date:

Judge’s signature

City and state:

Printed name and title

6HHDWWDFKHGVWDWHPHQWRIIDFWV

9

Complainant’s signature

'DWHRI%LUWK;;;;;;;;

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

District of &ROXPELD

I, the complainant in this case, state that the following is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

On or about the date(s) of in the county of in the

LQWKH'LVWULFWRI &ROXPELD , the defendant(s) violated:

$WWHVWHGWRE\WKHDSSOLFDQWLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVRI)HG5&ULP3

E\WHOHSKRQH

:DVKLQJWRQ'&

Jesus Rivera

(AKA: JD Rivera, Jesus Delamora Rivera)

January 6, 2021

18 USC § 1752(a)(1) Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful 

Authority 

18 USC § 1752(a)(2) Knowingly, With Intent to Impede Government Business or Official Functions, Engaging in 

Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds 

40 USC § 5104(e)(2)(D) Engaging in Disorderly or Disruptive Conduct on Capitol Buildings or Grounds 

40 USC § 5104(e)(2)(G) Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in the Capitol Buildings

Adam Mardel, Special Agent

01/19/2021

__Zia M. Faruqui, U.S. Magistrate Judge _

Case 3:21-mj-00003-EMT Document 1 Filed 01/20/21 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.2.12



December 31, 2017



CorEnergy Infrastructure Trust, Inc.
1100 Walnut Street, Suite 3350
Kansas City, Missouri  64106
Re:    Management Fee for the Quarter Ended December 31, 2017
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Reference is made to that certain Management Agreement, dated as of May 8, 2015 and effective as of May 1, 2015, by and between CorEnergy Infrastructure Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), and Corridor InfraTrust Management, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Manager”) (as such agreement has been, as may be further, amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Management Agreement”).  Capitalized terms used and not defined herein are used as defined in the Management Agreement.  


The Company and the Manager have entered into this Letter Agreement, effective as of December 31, 2017, to clarify the application of the Management Fee provisions set forth in Section 8(a) of the Management Agreement to the Company’s December 29, 2017 acquisition of the remaining 18.95% interest in Pinedale Corridor, LP, previously held by the Prudential Insurance Company of America.  This letter documents that the Manager has proposed, and the Company has agreed, that solely for the purpose of calculating the quarterly Management Fee due as of December 31, 2017, the definition of “Managed Assets” set forth in Section 8(a) of the Management Agreement shall be applied in a manner that continues to reduce Managed Assets by the initial invested value of the non-controlling interest in Pinedale Corridor, LP.  This letter in no way supersedes our May 9, 2016 letter agreement (effective March 31, 2016) concerning the Management Fee calculation.


The purpose of this clarification is to ensure the application of Section 8(a) of the Management Agreement to the acquisition of the remaining 18.95% interest in Pinedale Corridor, LP, in the manner that is most fair and equitable to the Company’s stockholders.  Except as specifically set forth herein, all other provisions of the Management Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be affected by this Letter Agreement.  Please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing by signing this Letter Agreement as indicated below.


	
				
	 
	 
	Very truly yours,

	 
	 
	CORRIDOR INFRATRUST MANAGEMENT, LLC

	 
	 
	By:  /s/ Richard C. Green, Jr.                                 

	 
	 
	Name:  Richard C. Green, Jr., Managing Director

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	Agreed and accepted:
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	CORENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE TRUST, INC.
	 

	By:  /s/ David J. Schulte                                          
	 
	 

	Name:  David J. Schulte, President
	 
	 






1100 Walnut Street, Suite 3350, Kansas City, MO 64106 | Main: 816.875.3705 | Fax: 816.875.5875 | corenergy.reit
1
Letter Agreement



 Exhibit 10.1 
 

 
  

			
	March 4, 2009	  	 Mark A. Suwyn
 Chairman & Chief Executive
Officer
 NewPage Corporation

		
	Mr. David J. Prystash	  	 937.242.9411 DIRECT
 937.242.9324
FAX
 mark.suwyn@newpagecorp.com


 Dear David, 
 I am
pleased to inform you that the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of NewPage Corporation (the Company) yesterday approved the payment to you of a bonus of $85,000, subject to the terms of this letter and subject to normal payroll
deductions and withholding (the Bonus). The Bonus compensates your for the retention bonus from your former employer that you lost when you accepted your current position with the Company. The Bonus will be paid to you upon receipt of your signed
acceptance of the terms of this letter. 
 By signing below and accepting the Bonus you agree that you will repay the Bonus in full to the Company (without
interest) if on or before February 23, 2011 (i) your employment with the Company is terminated by the Company or its successor for “Cause,” as defined in Section 5.1(a) of your Employment Agreement dated September 8,
2008, and at the effective date of termination a Change in Control has not then occurred, or (ii) you resign as an employee of the Company or its successor other than for “Good Reason,” as defined in Section 5.1(c) of your
Employment Agreement dated September 8, 2008, and at the effective date of resignation a Change in Control has not then occurred. For purposes of this letter, a “Change in Control” means (i) a transaction resulting in an
individual or entity or group of individuals and entities, other than Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. and its affiliates, having beneficial ownership (as defined in Rule 13d-3 promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission), directly
or indirectly, of more than 50% of the Company’s common stock, or (ii) the sale, transfer or other disposition of all or substantially all of the business or assets of the Company and its subsidiaries, taken as a whole and determined on a
consolidated basis, in each case whether by sale of assets, merger, consolidation, recapitalization, reorganization or otherwise, to an individual or entity or group of individuals and entities, other than Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. and its
affiliates. 
 Please sign and return a copy of this letter indicating your acceptance of and agreement to the foregoing terms. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	 /s/ Mark A. Suwyn

	Mark A. Suwyn
	Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

  


							
	8540 Gander Creek Drive, Miamisburg, OH 45342	  	937.242.9411 PHN	  	937.242.9324 FAX	 	www.newpagecorp.com










 Mr. David J. Prystash 
  Page
 2
 
  

 Accepted and agreed to: 
  

	
	 /s/ David J. Prystash

	David J. Prystash
	
	Date: April 20, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
Angeles Partners XIV 1998 First Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in its 
entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000759859
<NAME> ANGELES PARTNERS XIV
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998   
<CASH>                                             880
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      375
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          38,553
<DEPRECIATION>                                (23,918)   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  16,582   
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         41,635     
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0     
<PREFERRED>                                          0  
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (31,977)    
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    16,582    
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,361    
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,075    
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,110    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (714)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  2,244
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,530     
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    34.52<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

CLARK BARTHOLOMERE WILSON,

Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO.: 3:03cv566/MCR/MD

JAMES V. CROSBY,

Respondent.

 /

O R D E R

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

recommendation dated July 20, 2006. The petitioner 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 any objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the report and recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:

The Title 28 U.S.C. § 2254 amended petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 22)

challenging the conviction and sentence in the case of State of Florida v. Clark

Bartholomere Wilson, in the Circuit Court of Escambia County, Florida, case no. 97-2496,

is DENIED and this cause is DISMISSED and the clerk is directed to close the

file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 19th day of September, 2006.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers

 M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:03-cv-00566-MCR-MD Document 38 Filed 09/19/06 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 33.4



|     |  |                                                                                 
|---- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | SunTrust Bank Mail Code
VA-Richmond-HDQ3907 919 E Main Street Richmond, VA
23219

MANAGEMENTS ASSERTION ON COMPLIANCE

WITH REGULATION AB CRITERIA

SunTrust
Bank (the Asserting Party) is responsible for assessing compliance as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Reporting Period) with the servicing criteria set forth in Title 17, Section 229.1122(d)(4)(ii)
(the Applicable Servicing Criteria) of the Code of Federal Regulations (the CFR), for all Genworth Global Funding Trusts listed on Exhibit A hereto. The Asserting Party is not assessing compliance with any other
criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d) of the CFR.

The Asserting Party used the applicable criteria in paragraph (d) of Title
17, Section 229.1122 of the CFR to assess compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

The Asserting Party has concluded that
it has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2006 and for the Reporting Period.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2006 and for the Reporting Period.

SUNTRUST BANK



|       |  |                      
|------ |  | ---------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Beryl Ball       
|Name:  |  | Beryl Ball           
|Title: |  | Senior Vice President
|Dated: |  | 03/06/07             



---

EXHIBIT A

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2005-A

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2006-A

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2006-B

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2006-C

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2006-D

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2006-E

Genworth Global Funding Trust 2006-F

Genworth Global Funding
Trust 2006-G