alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet and statement of income and is qualified in it entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000857264
<NAME> KRUPP GOVERNMENT INCOME TRUST
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      23,826,862
<SECURITIES>                               205,639,210<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,673,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,868,301<F2>
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             241,007,994
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,830,408<F3>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   233,164,770
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,012,816<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               241,007,994
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,057,058<F5>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,015,269<F6>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,041,789
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,041,789
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,041,789
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33
<FN>
<F1>Includes Participating Insured Mortgage Investments ("PIMs") (insured mortgages
of $108,866,216 and Additional Loans of $19,209,108), Participating Insured
Mortgages ("PIMs") of $48,395,872 and Mortgage-Backed Securities ("MBS") of
$29,168,014.
<F2>Includes prepaid acquisition fees and expenses of $13,473,359 net of
accumulated amortization of $6,379,263 and prepaid participating servicing of
$4,491,005 net of accumulated amortization of $1,716,800.
<F3>Includes deferred income on Additional Loans of $6,824,154.
<F4>Unrealized gain on MBS.
<F5>Represents interest income on investments in mortgages and cash.
<F6>Includes $395,213 of amortization for prepaid fees and expenses.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
### ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RESIGNATION C pi E i "
.. ' I K. L NDEMAV BY 1101 ill? CHIEF DEFOrTTLERK 

# 1 1

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF RESIGNATION OF JAMES M. 0. MILLER, BAR NO. 10405. No. 70192 

# FILE MAY 0 9 2016

This is a joint petition by the State Bar of Nevada and attorney James M. 0. Miller for his resignation from the Nevada bar.

SCR 98(5) provides that Nevada attorneys who are not actively practicing law in this state may resign from the state bar if certain conditions are met. The petition includes statements from state bar staff confirming that no disciplinary, fee dispute arbitration, or client security fund matters are pending against Miller; and that he is current on all membership fee payments and other financial commitments relating to his practice of law in this state. 

### See SCR 98(5)(a)(1)-(2).

Bar counsel has recommended that the resignation be approved, and the Board of Governors has approved the application for resignation. 

### See SCR 98(5)(a)(2). Miller acknowledges that his resignation is irrevocable and that the state bar retains continuing jurisdiction with respect to matters involving a past member's conduct prior to resignation. 

### See SCR 98(5)(c)-(d). Finally, Miller has submitted an affidavit of compliance with SCR 115. 

### See SCR 98(5)(e).

(0) 1947A 44E07 

## )44743J.

J. The petition satisfies the requirements of SCR 98(5). Accordingly, we approve attorney James M.O. Miller's resignation. SCR 98(5)(a)(2). The petition is hereby granted.

It is so ORDERED.
, C.J. Parraguirre
Hardesty
J.

J. Pickering

cc: James M. Miller C. Stanley Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada Perry Thompson, Admissions Officer, U.S. Supreme Court

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A e
#### § 53.4958-5 Transaction in which the amount of the economic benefit is determined in whole or in part by the revenues of one or more activities of the organization. [Reserved]
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.7406-1 Disposition of judgments and moneys recovered.

All judgments and moneys recovered or received for taxes, costs, forfeitures, and penalties shall be paid to the district director as collections of internal revenue taxes.
Editorial Note on Part 301
Editorial Note: In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations. References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

§ 301.6061-1 Signing of returns and other documents. ( a ) *In general.* For provisions concerning the signing of returns and other documents, see the regulations relating to the particular tax.
( b ) *Method of signing.* The Secretary may prescribe in forms, instructions, or other appropriate guidance the method of signing any return, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision of the internal revenue laws or regulations.
( c ) *Effective dates.* The rule in paragraph (a) is effective December 12, 1996. The rule in paragraph (b) is effective on July 21, 1995.
[T.D. 8689, 61 FR 65320, Dec. 12, 1996]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Supreme Court No. DA 20

- 0242

STATE OF MONTANA

,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JOURNEY RYDER JOHN WIENKE,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is

given an extension of time until July 1 9 , 2021 to prepare, file and serve the

Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 21 2021

06/21/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0242
OFFICE OF THE A’l-I’ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

State Cow-d of Barber Exaridriers 

Xustin, Texas 

GeRtlQlEQn: 

bor Examiners. 

\\ 

the State TressuAyr' 

is paid from 

and aai: the 

all State departments 

State runas." 

Zeveriue Buni. If it had been the le@.slative intent to apply 

th? Act also to State de~art~entisauogo~ted - exolusively by 

aPProprintions from spaoiel funds, foes, and looalreceipts, 

it zould csem that the Legislature would merely have provided 

thEt the Aot should opgly to ell Stat0 departments exoept the 

eeucstional institutions of the State. 
-... 

state Emrd of Barber Examiners, Paae 2 

Ye therofore construe the Act as exoluding from 

Its operation those State dopartmcnto which are financed 

s~~~usivaly from spccinl funds. Therefore, in our opinion, 

the provisions of Se3atte 6111 No. 190 do not apply to the 

state Board of Ejnrber.Exa%iners. 

Yours very tNly 

ATMRXIX Gl!i?WV& OF TICXAS 

R. ST. Fairchild 

Aaaistant 

RXZ:pbp
In Reply Refer to:

NG032012

20 March 2012

The Honorable Ray LaHood

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Subject: Alaska Airlines’ Application for SAN-DCA, Docket No. DOT-OST-2012-0029

Dear Secretary LaHood:

Northrop Grumman fully supports the application of Alaska Airlines for air service 

between San Diego and Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA). San Diego is the 

largest region without direct service to DCA. Additionally, due to the profound 

community of interest between San Diego and the nation’s capital, the region 

generates the largest passenger market demand without nonstop service to the 

convenient and close-in airport serving our nation’s capital.

 

San Diego’s sheer market size to Washington, coupled with the fact that San Diego to

Dulles average airfares are the highest of west coast cities, should qualify for the limited 

slots available for this flight. The high airfare is exacerbated when factoring in taxi fares 

from Dulles to Washington’s city center that average about $60 each way. This means 

travelers between Washington’s city center and San Diego via Dulles can pay on average 

close to $400 one-way. 

There are also countless other San Diego-based and Washington-based businesses that 

are engaged in health science, telecommunications, and national defense that need quick 

and convenient access to Reagan National Airport. Northrop Grumman has an 

immediate need for additional nonstop air service to our nation’s capital. Alaska Airlines 

service would add a needed nonstop option to a primary gateway to Washington, DC. 

Northrop Grumman joins with the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, the San 

Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation, the World Trade Center San 

Diego, and the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce in support of Alaska Airlines’ 

application for San Diego – Washington Reagan National slots.
NG032012

20 March 2012

The Honorable Ray LaHood Page 2 of 2

We thank the Department of Transportation for the opportunity to comment on the above 

referenced docket and we hope to hear of a favorable review of Alaska Airlines’ San 

Diego – DCA proposal soon.

Sincerely,

Jim Zortman

Sector Vice President

Life Cycle Logistics and Support

Northrop Grumman Corporation

Site Manager, Unmanned Systems
#### § 20.2031-9 Valuation of other property.

The valuation of any property not specifically described in §§ 20.2031-2 to 20.2031-8 is made in accordance with the general principles set forth in § 20.2031-1. For example, a future interest in property not subject to valuation in accordance with the actuarial principles set forth in § 20.2031-7 is to be valued in accordance with the general principles set forth in § 20.2031-1.
Exhibit 32.1 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)



                        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                         AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
             SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Process Equipment, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending January 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report").  I,
George P. Cortessis, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge andbelief:

               (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of
                     section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
                     of 1934; and

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


/s/ George P. Cortessis
----------------------------
    George P. Cortessis
    Chief Executive Officer
    Chief Financial Officer

Date  March 24, 2004
      --------------

<PAGE>
#### Mendel Sirkis et al., Respondents, v Jacob Cohen et al., Defendants, and Brooklyn Sawdust Construction, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[805 NYS2d 550]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the defendants Brooklyn Sawdust Construction, Inc., Israel Berkovic, Levi Berkovic, and Raizy Berkovic appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), dated June 16, 2004, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion to “restore” the action to active status.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs’ motion to “restore” the action to active status *(see Long-Waithe v Kings Apparel Inc.,*10 AD3d 413, 414 [2004]; *Baez v Kayantas,*298 AD2d 416 [2002]; *cf. Murray v Smith Corp.,*296 AD2d 445, 446 [2002]). Contrary to the contention of the defendants Brooklyn Sawdust Construction, Inc., Israel Berkovic, Levi Berkovic, and Raizy Berkovic (hereinafter the defendants), they waived their objection to the plaintiffs’ filing of a summons with notice that *370did not comply with CPLR 305 (b) by appearing in the action, answering the complaint, and litigating the merits of the action without raising this objection *(see Matter of Fry v Village of Tarrytown,*89 NY2d 714, 720-721 [1997]; *Allianz Ins. Co. v City of New York,*19 AD3d 159, 160 [2005]; *Livingston v Wagi,*284 AD2d 378 [2001]; *cf. Parker v Mack,*61 NY2d 114, 117-118 [1984]).

The defendants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Florio, J.P., Crane, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.6511(f)-1 Special rules for chapter 42 taxes.

(a) *In general.* Claims for credit or refund of an overpayment of any tax imposed by chapter 42 shall be filed by the taxpayer within 3 years from the time a return was filed by the private foundation or trust (as the case may be) with respect to such tax, or within 2 years from the time the tax was paid, whichever of such periods expire the later.

(b) *Examples.* This section may be illustrated by the following examples:

# Example 1.

In 1972, D, an individual taxpayer who was a disqualified person under the provisions of section 4946(a)(1), participated in an act of self-dealing with a private foundation and incurred a tax under section 4941(a)(1). The private foundation files a Form 990-PF on May 15, 1973, and discloses thereon that it has engaged in an act of self-dealing with D. D files a Form 4720 on July 2, 1973, and pays the amount of tax imposed by section 4941(a) with respect to such act of self-dealing. For purposes of this section, the return was filed on May 15, 1973, and any claim for credit or refund by D must be filed by May 17, 1976 (May 15, 1976, was a Saturday).

# Example 2.

Assume the same facts as in example 1 except that D filed a Form 4720 on July 1, 1974, and pays the tax on that date. D must then file any claim for credit or refund by July 1, 1976.

[T.D. 7838, 47 FR 44252, Oct. 7, 1982]
#### Heating Acceptance Corporation *v.*Hullie M. Patterson

*Herbert Watstein,*with whom was *Julius Watstein,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

*John J. Hunt,*for the appellant (defendant).

Argued January 7

decided January 8, 1964

The motion by the plaintiff to dismiss the appeal from the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County is denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains financial information from the Consolidated Balance Sheet
at  September  30, 2000(unaudited) and the Consolidated Statements of Income for
the  nine  months  ended  September  30, 2000(unaudited) and is qualified in its
entirety  by  reference  to  such  statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. Dollars

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                         1
<CASH>                                       10275
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                        4592
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             20300
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                 0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  30414
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       30414
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          1388
<LOANS>                                     168180
<ALLOWANCE>                                   2357
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              241518
<DEPOSITS>                                  202294
<SHORT-TERM>                                  3500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           2264
<LONG-TERM>                                  13000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                      3422
<OTHER-SE>                                   17038
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              241518
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              12186
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             1218
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               515
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             13919
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            5906
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            6570
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         7349
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  317
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              10
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                               5379
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               2918
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    2918
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                  2004
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .54
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   5
<LOANS-NON>                                    388
<LOANS-PAST>                                   136
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              2163
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  219
<RECOVERIES>                                    96
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             2357
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                          2357
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                              0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          0




</TABLE>
§ 31.6695-1 Other assessable penalties with respect to the preparation of tax returns for other persons. ( a ) *In general.* A person who is a tax return preparer of any return or claim for refund of employment tax under chapters 21 through 25 of subtitle C of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) shall be subject to penalties for failure to furnish a copy to the taxpayer under section 6695(a) of the Code, failure to sign the return under section 6695(b) of the Code, failure to furnish an identification number under section 6695(c) of the Code, failure to retain a copy or list under section 6695(d) of the Code, failure to file a correct information return under section 6695(e) of the Code, and negotiation of a check under section 6695(f) of the Code, in the manner stated in § 1.6695-1 of this chapter.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78454, Dec. 22, 2008]
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.6521-2 Law applicable in determination of error.

The question of whether there was an erroneous treatment of self-employment income or of wages is determined under the provisions of law and regulations applicable with respect to the year or other taxable period as to which the error was made. The fact that the error was in pursuance of an interpretation, either judicial or administrative, accorded such provisions of law and regulations at the time the action involved was taken is not necessarily determinative of this question. For example, if a later judicial decision authoritatively alters such interpretation so that such action is contrary to the applicable provisions of the law and regulations as later interpreted, the error comes within the scope of section 6521.

Periods of Limitation in Judicial Proceedings
- 

. 

OFFlCE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTlN 

January 26, 1939; 

Ron. I?. Lee O’Danial 

Governor of Teraa 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Governor: 

answer that Q brother of the wife 

Yours very truly 

ASR:BT 

Assistant
N O

. PD

- 0172

- 15

T O THE C OURT O F C RIMINAL A PPEALS

No. 01

- 13

- 00373

- CR

N ORMA C LARK

Appeal from Cause Number 1295757

From the 22 8th District Court

Harris County

vs.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS

A PP ELLANT ’ S FINAL M OTION FOR E XTENSION

F OR 4 D

AYS

WITH PDR ALREADY FILED

T O T HE H ONORABLE J UDGES O F T HE C OURT O F C RIMINAL A PPEALS :

C OMES N OW

, N ORMA C LARK

, and files this Final Motion to Extend Time to File

PDR , and in support thereof, would respectfully show the Court the following:

I.

The First Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment in an opinion dated

January 13, 2015. Clark v. State , 01

- 13

- 00373

- CR, 2015 WL 162257 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Jan. 13, 2015, no. pet. h.). One motion for extension was granted

and the PDR was due on March 16, 2015. The PDR was filed on March 20, 2015.

II.

Counsel humbly requests this extension due to the fact that counsel suffers from a

chronic painful condition that has recently caused a disruption in counsel ’ s work

s chedule and slightly delayed the filing of the PDR in this important and complex

case.

Additionally, counsel has been engaged in work in the Harris County Public

Defender’s Office on many cases, including the following:

 Lenin Lopez, 01

- 13

- 01079

- CR, reversed and set for retrial in cause #1403196 PD-0172-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 3/23/2015 9:02:51 AM

Accepted 3/25/2015 10:53:40 AM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK Vincent William, #1420283

 Darryle Robertson, 14

- 15

- 00132

- CR

 Rodney Robins, 01

- 14

- 00582

- CR

 Craig Beal, 01

- 12

- 00896

- CR

 Abner Washington, 01

- 14

- 00885

- CR

 Forest Penton, 14

- 14

- 00406

- CR

 Leonard Storemski, 14

- 14

- 00920

- CR

 Felix Irizarry, 14

- 14

- 00827

- CR

 Eddie Aldape, 14

- 14

- 00996

- CR

 Leslie Markle, 01

- 13

- 01028

- CR

 Counsel has been researching and writing for several trial cases assigned to the

Public Defender’s Office Trial Division.

III.

Appellant ’ s attorney requests an extension of 4 days

, which is necessary so that the

brief can be thoro ughly written and timely filed. This motion is not made for the

purpose of delay.

PRAYER

W HEREFORE

, P REMISES C ONSIDERED

, Appellant prays that this Honorable Court

grants this requested extensi on of time to file the PDR in the above cause and extend

the time for filing to the date PDR was filed or March 20 , 2015

.

Respectfully submitted,

A LEXANDER B UNIN

Chief Public Defender

Harris County, Texas

/s/ Sarah V. Wood

S ARAH V. W OOD

Assistant Public DefenderHarris County, Texas

Texas Bar Number 24048898

1201 Franklin, 13 th Floor

Houston Texas 77002

713.368.0016 (phone)

713.368.9278 (fax)

Sarah.Wood@pdo.hctx.net

C ERTIFICATE OF S ERVICE

By my signature below, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of t h e above and

foregoing Appellant ’s Motion to Extend Time to File PDR has been served via the

efile service on the Harris County District Attorney’s Office.

/s/ Sarah V. Wood

Sarah V. Wood