alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex10_710.htm


    
Exhibit 10.7.10

      


      


      Summary
Description of November 2, 2009 Compensation Committee Action On

      2010
Executive Base Salaries and 2009 Executive Bonus Opportunities

      


      At a meeting held on November 2, 2009,
the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of CBL & Associates
Properties, Inc. (the “Company”) approved the actions described below affecting
the compensation of the following three individuals who currently qualify as
“named executive officers” of the Company pursuant to Item 402(a)(3) of
Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-K:

      


      
        	
                Name:

              	
                Title:

              
	
                Charles B.
    Lebovitz

              	
                Chairman
      of the Board and

                Chief
      Executive Officer

              
	
                John N. Foy

              	
                Vice
      Chairman of the Board, Chief Financial Officer and
    Treasurer

              
	
                Stephen D.
    Lebovitz

              	
                Director,
      President and Secretary

              


      

      


      The Compensation Committee decided to
maintain 2010 Base Salaries for the Company’s named executive officers at 2009
levels. Accordingly, the 2010 Base Salary levels for the Company’s named
executive officers will be the same as those reflected for the current year in
the Company’s Proxy Statement for its 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the
“2009 Proxy Statement”).

      


      Additionally, the Compensation
Committee approved the annual bonus compensation that each of the named
executive officers could receive for performance during the 2009 fiscal year,
based on the performance factors similar to those used in determining bonuses in
prior years for each such officer as described in the 2009 Proxy Statement.
Management also recommended that these bonuses, like those of all other Company
employees, be subject to a 50% reduction in light of current economic conditions
and the Company’s ongoing cost containment policies, and the Compensation
Committee agreed with management’s recommendation.  After reflecting
these reductions, the fiscal 2009 bonuses approved for each of the named
executive officers were as follows: Charles B. Lebovitz – $337,500; John N. Foy
– $ 337,500 and Stephen D. Lebovitz – $337,500.
IV 

House Calendar No. 96 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 468 

[Report No. 109–238] 

Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to 

consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2005 

Mr. SESSIONS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with 

respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported 

from the Committee on Rules. 

1 Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule 

2 XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the 

3 Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to 

4 the House is waived with respect to any resolution re5 ported on the legislative day of September 29, 2005, pro6 viding for consideration or disposition of a conference re7 port to accompany the bill (H.R. 2360) making appropria-
2 

HRES 468 RH 

1 tions for the Department of Homeland Security for the 

2 fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for the other 

3 purposes. 

House Calendar No. 96 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 468 

[Report No. 109–238] 

RESOLUTION 

Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII 

tions reported from the Committee on Rules. with respect to consideration of certain resoluSEPTEMBER 28, 2005 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
Exhibit 31

 

SEMT 2013-1

 

EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

 

I, Garnet W. Kanouse, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-1 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue 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 be provided 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 Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities 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-18 have 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: CoreLogic Solutions, LLC (“CoreLogic”), American Security Insurance Company, Standard Guaranty Insurance Company and TrackSure Insurance Agency, Inc. (collectively, “Assurant”), Cenlar, FSB as Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer, PHH Mortgage Corporation as Servicer, EverBank as Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian and Master Servicer, and Citibank, N.A. as Securities Administrator and Paying Agent.

 

Date: March 27, 2020

 

 

/S/  Garnet W. Kanouse

Signature 

 

President

(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
#### Town of Centreville, Appellant, v. Frank Reinhardt, Appellee.

opinion filed June 14, 1940.

Thos L. Fekete, Jr., for appellant; Kramer, Campbell, Costello & Wieehert, for appellee.

Opinion by

Presiding Justice Stone.

“Hot to be published in full.’’
file:///J|/INITENG/P12%20cases/p120432.eng.txt[7/30/2012 10:29:30 AM] INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 12-0432 Focus Ready Draft 7/23/2012 ENGINEER: Jon \ DDH PV (kg/yr):
SUBMITTER: USE:

OTHER USES:

SAT (concerns) (07/06/2012): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:file:///J|/INITENG/P12%20cases/p120432.eng.txt[7/30/2012 10:29:30 AM] Migration to groundwater: negl-slow PBT rating: P2B2T1 . Health: 2 Inhalation Eco: 1 No releases to Water OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 2-3A NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.file:///J|/INITENG/P12%20cases/p120432.eng.txt[7/30/2012 10:29:30 AM] INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 12-0432file:///J|/INITENG/P12%20cases/p120432.eng.txt[7/30/2012 10:29:30 AM]file:///J|/INITENG/P12%20cases/p120432.eng.txt[7/30/2012 10:29:30 AM] INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 12-0432file:///J|/INITENG/P12%20cases/p120432.eng.txt[7/30/2012 10:29:30 AM]
#### § 170.4 Interpretations.

Except as specifically authorized by the Commission in writing, no interpretation of the meaning of the regulations in this part by an officer or employee of the Commission other than a written interpretation by the General Counsel will be recognized to be binding upon the Commission.
938 A.2d 43

#### Kevin T. FORD et al. v. Kenneth P. NARAIN.

No. 115

Sept. Term, 2007.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Dec. 27, 2007.

Ronald C. Hill, Ft. Washington, for appellants.

Brent M. Ahalt (McNamee, Hosea, Jernigan, Kim, Greenan & Walker, P.A., Greenbelt), all on brief, for appellee.

Submitted Before BELL, C.J., RAKER, HARRELL, BATTAGLIA and GREENE, JJ.

PER CURIAM

ORDER

The petition for writ of certiorari in the above-entitled case having been granted and the Court having considered a motion to dismiss writ of certiorari as improvidently granted with response filed thereto, it is this 27th day of December, 2007,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, a majority of the Court concurring, that the motion to dismiss be, and it is hereby granted; and it is further

ORDERED that the writ of certiorari be, and it is hereby, dismissed with costs, the petition having been improvidently granted.
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 38 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 38 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 38 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 38 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 38 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 38 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 6 of 6
Exhibit 35.1



|     |  |  |  |                                                                          
|---- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  |  |  | Corporate Trust Services 9062 Old Annapolis
Road Columbia, Maryland 21045

Citibank N.A.

17g-5 Information
Provider

ratingagencynotice@citi.com



|RE: | Annual Statement as to Compliance
|--- | ---------------------------------

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo), as Master Servicer, hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2013 (the Reporting Period):

(a) a review of Wells Fargos activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the applicable servicing agreement
listed on Schedule A hereto (the Servicing Agreement) has been made under my supervision; and

(b) to the best of my
knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period, except as described on Schedule B hereto.



|                      
|----------------------
|February 27, 2014     
|                      
|/s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
|Kristen Ann Cronin    
|Vice President        
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO



---

Schedule A

Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated January 1, 2013 for Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-1, by and among Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc., as Depositor,
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator, and Christiana Trust, a Division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee. 1



|1 | The Pooling and Servicing Agreement was amended and restated effective January 1, 2014 to reflect the resignation of Wells Fargo as the Securities Administrator and Paying Agent (among other roles). See the Form
8-K filed on January 6, 2014 for additional information.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2



---

Schedule B

None



3
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 80487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32066]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-2370-000]

Cambria CoGen Company; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

December 15, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Cambria CoGen Company's application for market-based rate authority, 
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes 
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is January 4, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please e-mail [email protected], or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-32066 Filed 12-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
#### VORON, Appellant, v. CHAIT, Respondent, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 11, 1914.)

Action by Isaac Voron against Sabbatia Chait, impleaded. A. C. Cass, of New York City, for appellant. L. I. Grossfield, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 150 N. Y.. Supp. 433, 1116.
#### PERRY, Respondent, v. BARRETT MFG. CO., Appellant, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

December 31, 1914.)

Action by Eugene A. Perry against the Barrett Manufacturing Company and others.

No opinion. Order reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Special Term to pass upon that part of the motion which seeks to make the answer more definite and certain..
COURTROOM DEPUTY MINUTES DATE : SEPTEMBER 25, 2006

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA DIGITAL RECORDED: 1:25 p. m. to 1:26 p.m.

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 

PRESIDING MAG. JUDGE: CHARLES S. COODY DEPUTY CLERK: WANDA STINSON 

CASE NUMBER: 2:06CR205-WHA-CSC DEFENDANT NAME: SEBASTIAN K. SMITH

 

APPEARANCES

GOVERNMENT DEFENDANT

ATTY. CHRISTOPHER SNYDER ATTY. DONNIE BETHEL

/ DISCOVERY STATUS: Complete.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

 _________________________________________________________________________________________

/ PENDING MOTION STATUS: None.

/ PLEA STATUS: Possible Plea

__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

/ TRIAL STATUS: Will take 2 days to try cases, if goes to trial.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

 REMARKS:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Case 2:06-cr-00205-WHA-CSC Document 25 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32.2

   Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Water Chef, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2007
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge and upon a review of the Report
that:

     (1) the Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of the
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), fully
     complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; and

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

This certification is based upon, among other things, my responsibilities as
Chief Executive Officer, my own due diligence and representations made by
certain members of the Company's senior management.


Dated: December 19, 2007
                                            /s/ Terry R. Lazar
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Terry R. Lazar
                                            Director and Chief Financial Officer
§ 501.60 Purpose and scope. ( a ) ( 1 ) If the owner or operator plans to construct a new baseload powerplant and the unit will not be in compliance with the prohibition contained in section 201(a) of FUA, this subpart establishes the procedures for filing a petition requesting a temporary or permanent exemption under, respectively, sections 211 and 212 of FUA.
( 2 ) Self-certification alternative. If the owner or operator plans to construct a new baseload powerplant not in compliance with the prohibitions contained in section 201(a) of FUA, this subpart establishes the procedures for the filing of a self-certification under section 201(d) of FUA.
( 3 ) If the petitioner owns, operates or controls a new powerplant, this subpart provides the procedures for filing a petition requesting extension of a temporary exemption granted under sections 211 or 311 of FUA.
( 4 ) If the petitioner owns, operates or controls a new or existing powerplant or MFBI, this subpart provides the procedures for filing a petition requesting extension of a temporary exemption granted under section 211 or section 311 of FUA.
( b ) If the petition is for an extension of a temporary exemption, the petitioner must apply for this extension at least (90) days prior to the expiration of the temporary exemption.
(Department of Energy Organization Act, Pub. L. 95-91, 91 Stat. 565 (42 U.S.C. 7101 *et seq.*); Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-620, 92 Stat. 3269 (42 U.S.C. 8301 *et seq.*); Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, Pub. L. 97-35; E.O. 12009, 42 FR 46267, Sept. 15, 1977)
[46 FR 59889, Dec. 7, 1981, as amended at 47 FR 50849, Nov. 10, 1982; 54 FR 52892, Dec. 22, 1989]
#### United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Respondent, v. William Green, Appellant.

Judgment entered July 24, 1969 which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment for a total of $1,625,229.36, inclusive of interest and costs, and order entered August 6, 1969 granting defendant’s motion for reargument and on reargument adhering to the original decision are unanimously affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements to the respondent. Defendant does not deny the expenditures or knowledge thereof, plaintiff offered voluntarily a discovery of all checks; defendant did not take advantage of this offer. The expenditures were accepted by the court as prima facie proof of the extent of defendant’s liability, in accordance with paragraph 5 of the Indemnity Agreements, the pertinent portion of which follows: *“*5. The vouchers or other evidence of payments made by the Surety under any of such bonds or obligations shall be prima facie evidence in establishing the liability assumed ”. The defendant was then required to come forward with proof if he sought to dispute the items. The defendant was familiar with the job; the plaintiff surety company was not. The defendant was thus in a better position to determine the propriety and reasonableness of the expenditures for completion of the jobs than the plaintiff. This could have been done by physical inspection alone. Defendant has failed to produce any proof whatsoever. For these reasons and for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Gellinoff at Special Term, we affirm the grant of summary judgment and the adherence thereto on reargument. Concur — Nunez, McNally and Steuer, JJ.; Capozzoli, J. P., and Tilzer, J., concur in the following memorandum: We concur in the affirmance. But for the defendant’s failure for two years, and on 12 occasions, to take.advantage of the opportunity to examine plaintiff before trial, we would have remanded this matter for an assessment of damages. [64 Misc 2d 1.]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 345 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 58
109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 345

                          [Report No. 109-159]

 Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 29, 2005

    Mr. Putnam, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on the legislative 
day of Thursday, June 30, 2005, for the Speaker to entertain motions 
that the House suspend the rules. The Speaker or his designee shall 
consult with the Minority Leader or her designee on the designation of 
any matter for consideration pursuant to this resolution.
    Sec. 2. Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order, 
any rule of the House to the contrary notwithstanding, to consider 
concurrent resolutions providing for adjournment of the House and 
Senate during the month of July.
                                                  House Calendar No. 58

109th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 345

                          [Report No. 109-159]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 29, 2005

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
37°30 goxAwe

74°
gag) 37°30 ‘=~
bP
RG
Bet
ay
Js

15! aa

WL

ae
YEG I

]

Bt 37° i

TH |
NORFOLK CANYON |
SCALE 1: 100,000

CORRECTED METERS L-158

ovtours 1A |
ce ere cred TERS)
PGI 222.7404 Waiver.       (c) Requests for waivers to the policy at DFARS 222.7402 must be submitted to the Secretary of Defense through the Office of the Principal Director, Defense Pricing and Contracting (Contract Policy). Requests for waivers may be submitted via email at osd.pentagon.ousd-a-s.mbx.asda-dp-c-contractpolicy@mail.mil. Include “Waiver-Mandatory Arbitration” in the subject line of the message.    **Parent topic:** PGI 222.74 -RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF MANDATORY ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS