alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Louis Fuchs, Appellant, *v.*Harris Aaronsohn, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Manhattan.

J. H. Wood, for appellant.

I. Marks, for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The plaintiff’s claim was that at the time of the action the defendant wrongfully detained the chattels in question. The evidence showed that there was no wrongful detention, and, therefore, the judgment awarding the chattels to the defendant was proper.

The defendant not having unlawfully detained the property was entitled to recover, and as he had been deprived of the property it was proper that it should he restored to him, or that he should have its value. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Present: Truax, P. J., Scott and Dugro, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### § 4.57 Static foot deformities.

It is essential to make an initial distinction between bilateral flatfoot as a congenital or as an acquired condition. The congenital condition, with depression of the arch, but no evidence of abnormal callosities, areas of pressure, strain or demonstrable tenderness, is a congenital abnormality which is not compensable or pensionable. In the acquired condition, it is to be remembered that depression of the longitudinal arch, or the degree of depression, is not the essential feature. The attention should be given to anatomical changes, as compared to normal, in the relationship of the foot and leg, particularly to the inward rotation of the superior portion of the os calcis, medial deviation of the insertion of the Achilles tendon, the medial tilting of the upper border of the astragalus. This is an unfavorable mechanical relationship of the parts. A plumb line dropped from the middle of the patella falls inside of the normal point. The forepart of the foot is abducted, and the foot everted. The plantar surface of the foot is painful and shows demonstrable tenderness, and manipulation of the foot produces spasm of the Achilles tendon, peroneal spasm due to adhesion about the peroneal sheaths, and other evidence of pain and limited motion. The symptoms should be apparent without regard to exercise. In severe cases there is gaping of bones on the inner border of the foot, and rigid valgus position with loss of the power of inversion and adduction. Exercise with undeveloped or unbalanced musculature, producing chronic irritation, can be an aggravating factor. In the absence of trauma or other definite evidence of aggravation, service connection is not in order for pes cavus which is a typically congenital or juvenile disease.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

Certification of CEO pursuant to Securities Exchange Act rules 13a-15 and
15d-15(c) as adopted pursuant to section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002.

I, Robert Genesi, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of GTDATA Corporation (the
"Registrant");

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15(c)) for the registrant and have: a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b) evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and c) presented
in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions): a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and
have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
internal controls; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: November 19, 2003

/S/ ROBERT GENESI
--------------------
ROBERT GENESI
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
(PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
# September 14, 2010

MEMORANDUM

TO: Phil Mulrine

FROM: Sandy Burns

RTI International

SUBJECT: Emissions from High Risk Steel Pickling Facilities

Initial screening-level risk modeling for the Steel Pickling Facilities and HCl Regeneration

Plants conducted in 2009 identifi ed six facilities with unusually high risk. Upon further scrutiny,

the emissions used in the model – reported in NE I and TRI – also seemed unrealistically high for

these facilities. As a result, we chose to follow up with the facilities in question to determine if

the emissions are, in fact, representative. F acilities were contacted in July 2009. Table 1

summarizes facility names, reported emissions, a nd information collected regarding emissions.

It was discovered that two of the facilities do not conduct steel pickling so they were deleted

from the facility list. The remaining four facilities provided clarification for their reported

emissions (see Table 1 for summary). The shaded numbers in Table 1 are the numbers used in

subsequent risk modeling.

1Table 1. Initial High-Risk facilitiesFacility NameFacility location2005 NEI(NATA)HCl2005 NEI(NATA)Cl2005 NEIStateSubmittalHCl2005 NEIStateSubmittalCl2006 TRIHCl2006 TRICl2007 TRIHCl2007 TRIClNotesI/N TEK I/N KOTE COMBINED New Carlisle, IN 8.654.053.924.84According to David Lisak at the facility, the 4.05 tpy is correct; 8.65 isway too high. Process controlled w/scrubber (currently listed asuncontrolled).SEVERSTAL WHEELING INC. Wheeling, WV 718768666According to Bud Smith in Environmental Control, this facilitydoes notconduct steel pickling. Pickling conducted at other facilities and thenshipped here. HCl is used for cleaning (small amt). The flux used forgalvanizing is ammonium zinc chloride - tARCELORMITTAL WEIRTON Weirton, WV 15.02.09 0.84 1.08 0.61According to Dave Minda, one emission point is the pickling line andother three are HCl regeneration units, all controlled by scrubbers.Stated that the State submittals are correct; 15.0 tpy is incorrect (waytoo high).MAGNETICS INTERNATIONAL, INC. Burns Harbor, IN 15.5 21.5 1.88 0.22 2.41 15.3 1.93 2.96HCL regeneration only (no steel pickling). According to Franz Mullins atthe facility, 2005 NEI data are not representative. The others are all fromstack tests; Cl emiss are highly variable and they are currently talking toRegion 5 about setting a siteAK STEEL CORPAshland, KY4.834.75According to Len Grey at the facility, theydo not conduct steelpickling.SEVERSTAL DEARBORNDearborn, MI 17.112.911.027.1According to James Earl at the facility, the 27.1 tpy was due to trialw/heat exchanger to reduce energy costs which resulted in increasedacid content and emissions. Situation now resolved. 12.9 and 11.0 aretypical annual emissions.Notes:•Blank cells indicate there are no emissions data for that pollutant/facility/data source.•The shaded numbers in Table 1 are the numbers used in subsequent risk modeling.•The 2005 NEI (NATA) totals shown above are for MACT 0310 only. The 2005 NEI State Submittal represents facility total HCl andCl emissions submitted by the state for the '05 NEI. 2006 and 2007 TRI are also2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Research Resources Special Emphasis Panel Conference Grant Meeting 1.                    

*Date:*                         October 26, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lisa A Newman, SCD, Scientific Review Officer, DHHS, National Institutes of Health, National Center for Research Resources, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Room 1074—MSC 4874, Bethesda, MD 20892-4874, (301) 435-0965,                         *newmanla2@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 93.306, 93.333; 93.702, ARRA Related Construction Awards, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 29, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-24000 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
§ 150.136 To what extent do state laws apply to my fiduciary operations? ( a ) *Application of state law.* To enhance safety and soundness and to enable Federal savings associations to conduct their fiduciary activities in accordance with the best practices of thrift institutions in the United States (by efficiently delivering fiduciary services to the public free from undue regulatory duplication and burden), the OCC intends to give Federal savings associations maximum flexibility to exercise their fiduciary powers in accordance with a uniform scheme of Federal regulation. Accordingly, Federal savings associations may exercise fiduciary powers as authorized under Federal law, including this part, without regard to state laws that purport to regulate or otherwise affect their fiduciary activities, except to the extent provided in 12 U.S.C. 1464(n) (state laws regarding scope of fiduciary powers, access to examination reports regarding trust activities, deposits of securities, oaths and affidavits, and capital) or in paragraph (c) of this section. For purposes of this section, “state law” includes any state statute, regulation, ruling, order, or judicial decision.
( b ) *Illustrative examples.* Examples of state laws that are preempted by the HOLA and this section include those regarding: ( 1 ) Registration and licensing;
( 2 ) Recordkeeping;
( 3 ) Advertising and marketing;
( 4 ) The ability of a Federal savings association conducting fiduciary activities to maintain an action or proceeding in state court; and
( 5 ) Fiduciary-related fees.
( c ) *State laws that are not preempted.* State laws of the following types are not preempted to the extent that they only incidentally affect the fiduciary operations of Federal savings associations or are otherwise consistent with the purposes of paragraph (a) of this section: ( 1 ) Contract and commercial law;
( 2 ) Real property law;
( 3 ) Tort law;
( 4 ) Criminal law;
( 5 ) Probate law; and
( 6 ) Any other law that the OCC, upon review, finds: ( i ) Furthers a vital state interest; and
( ii ) Either has only an incidental effect on fiduciary operations or is not otherwise contrary to the purposes expressed in paragraph (a) of this section.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          48,717
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                38,168
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    173,961
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         124,957
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           128,304
<LOANS>                                      1,178,250
<ALLOWANCE>                                     14,633
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,613,721
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,332,862
<SHORT-TERM>                                    64,121
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             14,484
<LONG-TERM>                                     56,929
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            9,779
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     135,546
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,613,721
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 76,995
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               12,120
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   942
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                90,066
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              38,245
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              42,430
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           47,636
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,898
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  69
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 30,405
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,587
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      21,587
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,963
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.54
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.72
<LOANS-NON>                                     11,343
<LOANS-PAST>                                       254
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   502
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                12,319
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,201
<RECOVERIES>                                       298
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               14,633
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            14,633
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of MSD Investment Corp. (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge:

(1) the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 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 Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: March 23, 2023

| |     |                        
| | --- | -----------------------
| | By: | /s/ Robert Platek      
| |     | Robert Platek          
| |     | Chief Executive Officer





---
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                      SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-QSB of Sports Entertainment Enterprises, Inc. for the period ending
September 30, 2003:

     (1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of All-
American SportPark, Inc.




/s/ Voss Boreta
-----------------------------
Voss Boreta
Chief Executive Officer
November 12, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Sports Entertainment
Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Sports Entertainment Enterprises,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
See H ernandez v . S

tate , 9 88 S.W. 2d

77 0 ( Te x. Crim. App. 19 99 ); Ex Pa rteDu ffy , 607 1 S.W. 2d 50 7 ( Te x. Crim. App. 19 80 ); Strickland v. W ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984). 

## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS

OF TE XAS N O . P D –0777- 08
G ER A LD W A Y N E SM I TH , A ppe l l ant

v . THE S TA TE OF TE X AS ON S TATE ’ S PET I TI ON FOR DI S CRETI ON ARY REVI EW FROM THE TENTH CO URT O F AP PEALS

M CLENNAN CO UNTY M E YE RS , J. , f

i l e d a di s s e nt i ng o pi ni on. DI S S E NT I NG OP I NI ON I n H er nandez , the maj or i tyoverrul ed the “r eas onabl yeff ect i ve as s i s t ance of
c o u n s e l ” s t a n d a r d f

r o m E x P a rte D u

ffy i n favorof Str i ckland ’s r e q u ire m e n t th a t a d ef en d an t sho w that h e w as p rejud iced b yh is at torn ey ’s de ficien t perf o rm an ce . W h at’s

1
m or e, the maj or i tyi n Her nandezgave no r eas on forabandoni ng the D u ffy sta n d a rd , o n ly
s t a t i n g : “ [ W ] e p e r c e i v e n o v a l i d r e a s o n w h y Str i ckland cannotappl y , orw hya di ffe r entSmith dissent–Page2

rul e s houl d appl y , t o noncapi t al s ent enci ng pr ocee di ngs . ” Her nandez , 9 8 8 S .W .2 d a t 7 7 2 . T he obvi ous r eas on forappl y i ng a di ffe r entrul e t o cl ai m s i nvol vi ng i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance atpuni s hm enti s thatthe Str i ckland s ta n d a rd is a b a rr ie r t h a t c a n n o t b e m e t in th is c o n te x t. I n th e t e n y e a r s s i n c e we s wi t c h e d f r o m D u ffy ’ s “r eas onabl yeff

ect i ve as s i s t ance of
couns el ” t o the Str i ckland s t andar d, w e have notgr ant ed r el i ef i n a s i ngl e ca s e r ai s i ng in e f f e c tiv e a ss ista n c e o f

c o u n se l at p u n ish m e n t. B a sic a lly , as lo n g a s th e se n ten c e is
w i thi n the norm at i ve puni s hm entr ange, the C our tcan s aythatthe def endanthas not sh o w n h a rm . T h u s, e v e n if a d e f e n d a n t re c e iv e s s u b sta n d a rd re p re se n tatio n , itis i m pos s i bl e forhi m t o s how thathi s s ent ence w oul d be di ffe r enti f hi s couns el had not b e e n d e f ic ie n t. I n H er nandez , I j oi ned J udge Pr i ce’ s di s s entt o the maj or i ty ’ s appl i cat i on of the Str i ckland

pr ej udi ce s t andar d t o noncapi t al s ent enci ng pr ocee di ngs . N ow w r i t i ng fort he
m a jo rity , Ju d g e P ric e p e rp e tu a tes th a t u n w o rk a b le s tan d a rd . T h e re f o re I re sp e c tf

u lly d iss e n t.

M ey ers , J. Fi l ed: J une 17, 2009 P ub l i sh
§ 1215.7 Serving demands and submitting requests. ( a ) All demands and requests must be in writing.
( b ) Demands must be served and requests must be submitted to the FHFA General Counsel at the following address: General Counsel, Federal Housing Finance Agency, Constitution Center, Eighth Floor, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20219.
( c ) Demands must not be served upon, nor requests submitted to any regulated entity for records, information, or testimony regardless of whether the records, information, or testimony sought are in the possession of, or known by, the regulated entity. If a regulated entity receives a request or demand for records, information, or testimony, the regulated entity must immediately notify the General Counsel and provide FHFA an opportunity to object to the demand or request before responding to the demand or request. Submitting a demand or request to a regulated entity may result in rejection of the demand or request under § 1215.9.
( d ) If an employee receives a request or demand that is not properly routed through FHFA's General Counsel, as required under this section, the employee must promptly notify the General Counsel. An employee's failure to notify the General Counsel is grounds for discipline or other adverse action.
[78 FR 39961, July 3, 2013, as amended at 80 FR 80233, Dec. 24, 2015]