alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(logo)TORCHLIGHT

 

 

**ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

 

CERTIFICATIONJ.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2015-C33, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through CertificatesSeries 2015-C33 (the “Trust”)

 

I, WilliamA. Clarkson, on behalf of Torchlight Loan Services, LLC, as special servicer(the “Certifying Servicer”), certify to J.P. Morgan Chase CommercialMortgage Securities Corp. and its officers, directors and affiliates, and withthe knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification, that:

 

I (orServicing Officers under my supervision) have reviewed the CertifyingServicer’s activities for the fiscal year 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) and theCertifying Servicer’s performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement;and

 

Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement inall material respects during the Reporting Period.  

 

 

Date:February 28, 2019

 

 

TORCHLIGHTLOAN SERVICES, LLC, as Special

Servicer

 

 

By: /s/ William A. Clarkson

Name: William A. Clarkson

Title: Authorized Signatory

 

 

280 Park Avenue, New York,NY 10017

T 212.883.2800  F 212.883.2560

E info@torchlightloanservices.com

www.torchlightinvestors.com
(logo) Rialto

CAPITAL

 

 

**2018 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item1123)**

 

 

Pooling and ServicingAgreement (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") dated as of August1, 2015 by and among Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., as Depositor,Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto CapitalAdvisors, LLC as Special Servicer, TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc. as TrustAdvisor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Certificate Administrator,as Tax Administrator and as Custodian, and Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation as Trustee relating to the Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust2015-SG1, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-SG1 **(WFCM2015-SG1)**

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the"Special Servicer")hereincertifies to the following:

 

1.       All servicing activities and performanceof such servicing activities under the Pooling and ServicingAgreement are performed on behalf of the SpecialServicer.

 

2.       A review of the servicing activities andperformance by the Special Servicer for the period of January 1, 2018to December 31, 2018 (the "Reporting Period")in accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement hasbeen conducted under my supervision.

 

3.       To the best of my knowledge, based on suchreview, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligationsunder the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement,in all material respects for the Reporting Periodand if there has been a failure to fulfill any suchobligations in any material respect, each failure and thenature and status thereof has been specificallyidentified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer

Adam Singer, Managing Director 

 

Date: March 1, 2019
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 4, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 38627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18757]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System.

TIME AND DATE: 12:00 p.m., Monday, August 10, 2009.

PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C 
Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, 
reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve 
System employees.
    2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Smith, Director, or Dave 
Skidmore, Assistant to the Board, Office of Board Members at 202-452-
2955.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may call 202-452-3206 beginning at 
approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a 
recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications 
scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at 
http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement that not 
only lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other 
information about the meeting.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 31, 2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9-18757 Filed 7-31-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 198 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 198

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 16, 1996

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 30, 1996

         Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the first annual 
                      Congressional Family Picnic.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
Whereas the Member's and Family Room is an official entity of the House of 
        Representatives, administratively under the Office of the Clerk of the 
        House;
Whereas the purpose of the Member's and Family Room is to facilitate family life 
        in congressional families, and to promote collegial relationships among 
        the sitting Members of Congress; and
Whereas a family picnic on the Capitol grounds would promote the purposes of the 
        Member's and Family Room: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF FIRST ANNUAL CONGRESSIONAL FAMILY PICNIC ON 
              CAPITOL GROUNDS.

    The Advisory Board of the Member's and Family Room (in this 
resolution referred to as the ``Advisory Board'') shall be permitted to 
sponsor an event, the first annual Congressional Family Picnic, on the 
Capitol grounds on July 30, 1996, or on such other date as the Speaker 
of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the 
Senate may jointly designate.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

    The event to be carried out under this resolution shall be arranged 
under conditions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and 
the Capitol Police Board.

SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

    For the purposes of this resolution, the Advisory Board is 
authorized to erect upon the Capitol grounds, subject to the approval 
of the Architect of the Capitol, such structures and equipment 
(including cooking equipment) as may be required for the event to be 
carried out under this resolution.

SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

    The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are 
authorized to make any such additional arrangements that may be 
required to carry out the event under this resolution.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 1.851-3 Rules applicable to section 851(b)(3). ( a ) *In general.* In determining the value of the taxpayer's investment in the securities of an issuer, for purposes of subparagraph (B) of section 851(b)(3), there shall be included its proper proportion of the investment of any other corporation, a member of a controlled group, in the securities of such issuer. *See Example 4* in § 1.851-5. For purposes of §§ 1.851-2, 1.851-4, 1.851-5, and 1.851-6, the terms “controls,” “controlled group,” and “value” have the meaning assigned to them by section 851(c). All other terms used in these sections have the same meaning as when used in the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C., chapter 2D), as amended.
( b ) *Effective/applicability dates.* The rules of this section apply to quarters that begin on or after December 14, 2015. For purposes of applying the first sentence of section 851(d)(1) to a quarter that begins on or after March 14, 2016, the rules of this section apply in determining whether the taxpayer met the requirements of section 851(b)(3) and
( c ) at the close of prior quarters.
[T.D. 9737, 80 FR 55245, Sept. 15, 2015]
( 

NSCAPCD amended 2/23/82/ _;;j;;_;;.j Sy 

RULE 220 NEH SOURCE REVIE\·1 STAND.?-.RDS (INCLUDING PSD 

EVALUATIONS)) 

(a} E~ission Ana1vsis 

In :evi~wing an A~thority to C=~str~=t for any n2w or 

r.tOC.i£ ied £;t.a tiona ry source- suh:i ect: to the r <~quirehlen ts of 

this chapter, the Control Officer s~all require the applicant 

to submit information sufficient to describe the nature and 

amounts of emissions; the location, design, construction, and 

ooeration of the source; and to submit any additional 

information requested by the Control Officer to make the 

approval determinations required by the provisions of Rule 

230. 

~ putDOSes ~ emission consjderat;ons: 

(l) -f3-t- Emissions from a proposed new or modified source 

shall be based on the source's potential to emit any air 

contaminant subject to regulation under the Clean Air. Act 

of 1977. (40 CFR 52.2l(b)(4)) 

(3) 

Emissions from a .proposed modified stationa~ source 

shall be based upon the cumulative net emission increases 

or reductions that may occur as a result of the 

modifications and subsequent operating permit conditions, 

excluding any emissions reductions required to comply 

with federal, state, or district laws, rules or 

regulations. (40 CFR 52.2l(b)(2 & 3)) 

~ Emissions from an existing stationary or previously 

permitted source shall gcner:..,., :.:: be based on the actual 

rate of air contaminant emissions during the two year 

period of operation prior to the date of application -o=- spea~~io ~~=iting p£rmi~ ce~diti~z. A different 

averaging period may be ~sed if the applicant 

demonst·rates to the satisfactic:1 of the Control Officer 

that it would be more represer:tative of norma1 source 

operation. (40 CFR 52.2l{b) (3 & 21))
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 7066** 
TESSA R. R. G. C. CHILDRESS, a/k/a Tessa Rani Raybourne Childress , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. CHARLESTON COUNTY SHERIFF ’ S OFFICE; DANA E HERRON, Inspector; INTERNAL AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS, The Charleston County Sheriff ’ s Office , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Charleston
. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 2:13

- cv - 01008

- SB )

Submitted : September 24 , 2013 Decided: September 27, 2013

Before NIEMEYER and THACKER , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Tessa R R G C Childress, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Tessa R
. R
. G
. C
. Childress appeals the district court ’ s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying reli ef on h er 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Childress v. Charleston Cnty. Sheriff’s Office , No. 2:13

- cv - 01008

- SB (D.S.C. June 26, 2013)
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 1.801-7 [Reserved]
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 30, 2012

p0123 

# Order

January 30, 2012

143868

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143868 COA: 305836 Macomb CC: 10-001222-FH JAMES HENRY MCHENRY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 22, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 1.734-2 Adjustment after distribution to transferee partner. ( a ) In the case of a distribution of property by the partnership to a partner who has obtained all or part of his partnership interest by transfer, the adjustments to basis provided in section 743(b) and section 732(d) shall be taken into account in applying the rules under section 734(b). For determining the adjusted basis of distributed property to the partnership immediately before the distribution where there has been a prior transfer of a partnership interest with respect to which the election provided in section 754 or section 732(d) is in effect, see §§ 1.732-1 and 1.732-2.
( b ) ( 1 ) If a transferee partner, in liquidation of his entire partnership interest, receives a distribution of property (including money) with respect to which he has no special basis adjustment, in exchange for his interest in property with respect to which he has a special basis adjustment, and does not utilize his entire special basis adjustment in determining the basis of the distributed property to him under section 732, the unused special basis adjustment of the distributee shall be applied as an adjustment to the partnership basis of the property retained by the partnership and as to which the distributee did not use his special basis adjustment. The provisions of this subparagraph may be illustrated by the following example: Example. Upon the death of his father, partner S acquires by inheritance a half-interest in partnership ACS. Partners A and C each have a one-quarter interest. The assets of the partnership consist of $10,000 cash and land used in farming worth $10,000 with a basis of $1,000 to the partnership. Since the partnership had made the election under section 754 at the time of transfer, partner S had a special basis adjustment of $4,500 under section 743(b) with respect to his undivided half-interest in the real estate. The basis of S's partnership interest, in accordance with section 742, is $10,000. S retires from the partnership and receives $10,000 in cash in exchange for his entire interest. Since S has received no part of the real estate, his special basis adjustment of $4,500 will be allocated to the real estate, the remaining partnership property, and will increase its basis to the partnership to $5,500.
( 2 ) The provisions of this paragraph do not apply to the extent that certain distributions are treated as sales or exchanges under section 751(b) (relating to unrealized receivables and substantially appreciated inventory items). See section 751(b) and paragraph (b) of § 1.751-1.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 28, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

128830 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. JOHN GORAJCZYK, individually, Stephen J. Markman, and as Next Friend of JOSEPH GORAJCZYK Justices and KAITLIN GORAJCZYK, minors, 

and MICHELLE GORAJCZYK, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

v SC: 128830 

 COA: 260911 
 Wayne CC: 03-336018-NO

DETROIT/WAYNE COUNTY STADIUM 

AUTHORITY, DETROIT LIONS, INC., 

SMITHGROUP COMPANIES, INC., 

HAMMES COMPANY SPORTS & 

ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, 

Defendants, 

and 

HUBER, HUNT & NICHOLS, INC., 

JENKINS CONSTRUCTION, INC., 

and SCHREIBER CORPORATION, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Chief Justice, a stipulation signed by counsel for the parties 

agreeing to the dismissal of this appeal is considered, and the appeal is DISMISSED with 

prejudice and without costs. 

p1122 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 28, 2005 

Clerk
Summary of Director Compensation


  Exhibit 10.30
 Summary Of Director Compensation
 Cash Compensation
 For 2006,
non-employee members of the Board received an annual retainer of $20,000, payable quarterly, and a $1,000 fee for each Board meeting attended. Non-employee chairpersons of Board committees received an additional $2,000 annual retainer, payable
quarterly. Non-employee committee members, including the chairperson, also receive a $1,000 fee for each committee meeting attended. Non-employee directors are also reimbursed for expenses they incur to travel to Board meetings. Employees who are
members of the Board receive no compensation for serving on the Board.
 Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors
 The deferred compensation plan for non-employee directors allows
non-employee directors to defer receipt of either 50% or 100% of any director fees and retainers. Deferral elections are made by eligible participants in December of each year for amounts to be earned in the following year. Participant accounts are
deemed to be invested in separate investment accounts under the plan, with the same investment alternatives as those available under the our nonqualified retirement plan, including an investment account deemed invested in shares of Company common
stock.. Participant accounts are adjusted to reflect the investment return related to such deemed investments. Participants are able to modify their investment elections monthly. Deferred director fees and retainers are payable at the director's
election, either as a lump sum or in installments over a period not to exceed fifteen years. Payments under this plan begin at the date specified by the director or upon cessation of service as a director.
 Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan
 The non-employee directors' stock option plan, or the Directors' Plan, provides for the granting of nonqualified stock options for shares of common stock to
non-employee Board members. The timing, amounts, recipients and other terms of the option grants are determined by the provisions of, or formulas in, the Directors' Plan. The exercise price of the options is equal to the average of the high and low
sales price of common stock on the date of the grant. All options have a term of ten years from the date of grant and become exercisable one year from the grant date subject to accelerated vesting in the event of end of Board service, death,
disability or a change in control. The options are nontransferable except to family members, family trusts or partnerships and include reload features. In 2006, each non-employee director was granted options to purchase 2,920 shares of common stock
at a weighted average exercise price of $33.92 per share. Directors first elected during the service year are granted options on a pro rata basis to those granted to the directors at the start of the service year.
August 31, 2015 

Court of Appeals 

Third District of Texas 

P.O. Box 12547 

Austin, Tx. 78711 

Tom McMinn 

Official Court Reporter 

County Court at Law No. 4 

405 MLK, Box 17 

Georgetown, Tx 78626 

(512)943-1682 

RE : Court of Appeals No. 03-15-00379-CV 

Trial Court Case No. 15-0748-CC4 

Style: Adrian Sanchez, et al 

v. Yellow Orchid, LLC 

Dear Ms. Strother, 

I am in receipt of your letting concerning the above cause. The record was due August 10, 2015. It 

is now due September 4, 2015. 

While appellants did contact me regarding the Reporter's Record, as of yet no arrangement of 

payment has been made. The record is not long and will not take long to prepare once payment 

is made. 

Sincerely, 

Tom McMinn 

..
Eleventh Court of Appeals Mandate

THE STATE OF TEXAS

TO THE 35TH DISTRICT COURT OF BROWN COUNTY, GREETINGS:

BEFORE our Court of Appeals for the Eleventh District of Texas, on January 5, 2018, the cause

upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Rolando Santamaria

11th Court of Appeals No. 11-17-00064-CR and

35th District Court Case No. CR24605

The State of Texas

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

 “This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed."

WHEREFORE WE COMMAND YOU To observe the order of our said Court of

Appeals for the Eleventh District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things to have it duly

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the HON. JOHN M. BAILEY,

Justice of this said Court, with the seal

thereof annexed at the City of Eastland, on

March 6, 2018.

SHERRY WILLIAMSON, CLERK

By: Myrna McGough, Deputy

FILE COPY
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 222

A resolution to commend the Razorbacks of the University of Arkansas

at Fayetteville for having won the 1994 NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 14 (legislative day, JUNE 7), 1994

Mr. BUMPERS (for himself and Mr. PRYOR) submitted the following

resolution; which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

A resolution to commend the Razorbacks of the University

of Arkansas at Fayetteville for having won the 1994

NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship.

Whereas the men’s basketball team of the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville had an outstanding and successful

season;

Whereas Arkansas Razorback Head Coach Nolan Richardson

was the recipient of the 1994 Naismith Coach of the

Year Award;

Whereas Arkansas Razorback Forward Corliss Williamson

was named 1994 NCAA Final Four’s Most Valuable

Player;
2

SRES 222 ATS

Whereas the University of Arkansas and the Arkansas Razorbacks christened the newly erected Bud Walton Arena

with their best season to date; and

Whereas the Arkansas Razorbacks handed the Duke Blue

Devils a 76–72 defeat, winning the 1994 NCAA men’s

basketball championship: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate commends the Razorbacks

2 of the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville for having

3 won the 1994 National Collegiate Athletic Association

4 Men’s Basketball Championship.

Æ
First Amendment to the Amended and Restated 2002 Long Term Incentive Plan



 
Exhibit 10.01a 
 AMENDMENT TO THE 
 RESTATED 2002 PRAXAIR, INC. LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 
 Section 5.3 of the
Restated 2002 Praxair, Inc. Long Term Incentive Plan, is hereby amended in its entirety as follows, effective as of October 24, 2006: 
 “5.3 Adjustment in the Event of Recapitalization, etc. In the event of any change in the outstanding shares of the Company by reason of any stock split, stock dividend, recapitalization, merger, consolidation, combination or
exchange of shares or other similar corporate change or in the event of any special distribution to the stockholders, the Committee shall make equitable adjustments in the number of shares and prices per share applicable to Stock Option Awards then
outstanding and in the number of shares which are available thereafter for Stock Option Awards or other awards, both under the Plan as a whole and with respect to individuals and award type. Such adjustments shall be made in a manner that the
Committee determines is necessary and appropriate, and shall be conclusive and binding for all purposes of the Plan.” 
  

	
	October 24, 2006
	
	PRAXAIR, INC.