alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### THOMPSON’S LESSEE *v.*LEINARD.

Sheriff’s deed prima facie evidence of the regularity of the proceedings — purchaser looks to the judgment, levy, sale and deed — irregularity in the other proceedings do not affect his title.

The act of 4th February, 1824, expressly provides that the sheriff’s deed shall be prima facie * evidence of the legality of the sale and of the proceedings, and vest in the purchaser as good a title as the judgment debtor had.

A purchaser at sheriff’s sale relies upon the judgment, levy, sale and deed: all other questions as to the regularity of the proceedings are between the parties to the suit and the officer.

Ejectment. The defendant claims title under a sheriff’s deed and sale upon execution. The deed is regular, and it is admitted that the whole proceedings are regular except that of the appraisement by the sheriff. If this does not invest the defendant with a legal title, it is agreed the plaintiff shall have judgment.

*Cowen,*for the plaintiff,

insisted there could be no valid sale on execution without an appraisement — and that as there was a defective appraisement, the deed was not conclusive upon that point, being made only prima fácie evidence of title. He cited 20 O. *L.*72; 3 *O. R.*489.

*Beebe,*contra.

Wright, J.

The question before us involves the inquiry, whether after sale of land on execution, a confirmation by the court, and deed to a stranger to the record, it is competent to inquire into the *459legality of the' appraisement, in order to invalidate the sale. The statute of February, 1824, 22 O. *L.*Ill, 12, expressly provides that the deed shall be *prima facie*evidence of the legality of the sale and of the proceedings, and vest the purchaser with as good a title as the judgment debtor had, &c. In this case there has been a judgment, levy, appraisement, sale, order of confirmation, and deed; but a defect in the appraisement has been discovered, which escaped' the notice of counsel before, and the court in confirming the sale. This Court has decided heretofore, that the purchaser at sheriff’s sale relies upon the judgment, the levy, sale, and deed; and that all other questions as to the regularity of the proceedings, are between the parties to the judgment and the officer. 3 O. *R.*191; 4 *Wheat.*503; 16 *John. R.*537; 3 *Bibb.*217. Those matters are not now open for examination between the judgment debtor and a purchaser ■who is not a party to the judgment.

Judgment for the defendant.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Adelphia Communications Corporation ("Adelphia") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Vanessa A. Wittman, Chief Financial Officer of Adelphia, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 results of operations of Adelphia.

|Date: October 7, 2005 | /s/VANESSA A. WITTMANVanessa A. Wittman
Chief Financial Officer
|--------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

Group Wage Creditors in the Litigation Captioned 

Madeline Acevedo-Camacho v Family Department, 

ARV and AIJ, Case No. 2016-05-1340; 

Claimants – Appellants

v.

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE 

COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO; THE 

FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEE’S 

RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE 

GOVERNMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH 

OF PUERTO RICO; THE FINANCIAL 

OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD 

FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE 

FOR THE PUERTO RICO HIGHWAYS AND 

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Appellees

 

 PROMESA

 Title III

 

 Case No. 17-bk-03283

 

 

NOTICE OF APPEAL

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Notice is hereby given that the Group Wage Creditors in the Litigation Captioned Madeline 

Acevedo-Camacho v Family Department, ARV and AIJ, Case No. 2016-05-1340, hereby appeals 

to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit the “Order Denying Motion Requesting 

Allowance and Payment of Administrative Expense Claims Filed by Wage Claimants” (See,

Exhibit A) entered in the above-captioned case on November 3, 2022 at Docket No. 22799

denying the Application for Allowance and Payment of Administrative Expense Claims Filed by 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23154 Filed:12/22/22 Entered:12/22/22 17:03:36 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

Group Wage Creditors in the Litigation Captioned Madeline Acevedo Camacho v. the Family 

Department, ARV, and AIJ of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Docket Entry No. 21194 in 

Case No. 17-3283).

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this date I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using 

the CM/ECF system which electronically mails notice to the attorneys of record. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

In San Juan, Puerto Rico this 22nd of December 2022.

THE BATISTA LAW GROUP, PSC. 

S/ Jesus E. Batista Sánchez

Jesus E. Batista Sánchez, Esq.

Attorney for the Appellants

USDC-PR No. 227014

P.O. Box 191059

San Juan, PR. 00919

Telephone: (787) 620-2856

Facsimile: (787) 777-1589

E-mail: jeb@batistasanchez.com

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23154 Filed:12/22/22 Entered:12/22/22 17:03:36 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 14, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 52708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24655]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 301

[REG-116614-08]
RIN 1545-BH90


Disregarded Entities and Excise Taxes; Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference 
to temporary regulations.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to a notice of proposed 
rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-116614-08) 
that was published in the Federal Register on Monday, September 14, 
2009, clarifying that a single-owner eligible entity that is 
disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for any purpose, but 
regarded as a separate entity for certain excise tax purposes, is 
treated as a corporation for tax administration purposes related to 
those excise taxes.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael H. Beker, (202) 622-3070 (not 
a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The correction notice that is the subject of this document is under 
section 7701 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

    As published on Monday, September 14, 2009 (74 FR 46957), the 
notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary 
regulations (REG-116614-08) contains errors that may prove to be 
misleading and are in need of clarification.

Correction of Publication

    Accordingly, the publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking 
by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-116614-08), which was 
the subject of FR Doc. E9-21986, is corrected as follows:
    1. On page 46958, column 2, instructional paragraph 2, item number 
4, the language ``4. Revising paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(5) and (e)(6).'' 
is corrected to read ``4. Revising paragraph (e)(2).''.
    2. On page 46958, column 2, new item number 5 is added to read ``5. 
Adding two sentences at the end of paragraph (e)(5).''.
    3. On page 46958, column 2, instructional paragraph 2, new item 
number 6 is added to read ``6. Adding one sentence at the end of 
paragraph (e)(6).''.


Sec.  301.7701-2  [Corrected]

    4. On page 46958, column 2, in Sec.  301.7701-2, paragraph (e)(5), 
first line, the language ``[The text of this proposed'' is corrected to 
read ``* * * [The text of this proposed''.
    5. On page 46958, column 2, in Sec.  301.7701-2, paragraph (e)(6), 
first line, the language, ``[The text of this proposed'' is corrected 
to read ``* * * [The text of this proposed''.

Diane O. Williams,
Federal Register Liaison, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal 
Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure and 
Administration).
[FR Doc. E9-24655 Filed 10-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Editorial Note on Part 708b
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 708b appear at 84 FR 1607, Feb. 5, 2019, and at 85 FR 62213, Oct. 2, 2020.

§ 708b.108 Completion of merger. ( a ) Upon approval of the merger proposal by the NCUA and by the state supervisory authority (where the continuing or merging credit union is a state credit union) and by the members of each credit union where required, the credit unions may complete the merger.
( b ) Upon completion of the merger, the board of directors of the continuing credit union must certify the completion of the merger to the Regional Director within 30 days after the effective date of the merger.
( c ) Upon the NCUA's receipt of certification that the merger has been completed, the NCUA will cancel the charter of the merging federal credit union (if applicable) and the insurance certificate of any merging federally insured credit union.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3467 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3467

  To redesignate the facility of the Bureau of Reclamation located at 
   19550 Kelso Road in Byron, California as the ``C.W. `Bill' Jones 
                            Pumping Plant''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 6, 2003

   Mr. Nunes (for himself, Mr. Cardoza, Mr. Doolittle, Mr. Dooley of 
 California, and Mr. Radanovich) introduced the following bill; which 
               was referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To redesignate the facility of the Bureau of Reclamation located at 
   19550 Kelso Road in Byron, California as the ``C.W. `Bill' Jones 
                            Pumping Plant''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF FACILITY.

    The facility of the Bureau of Reclamation located at 15990 Kelso 
Road in Byron, California, and known as the Tracy Pumping Plant, shall 
be known and designated as the ``C.W. `Bill' Jones Pumping Plant''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``C.W. `Bill' Jones Pumping 
Plant''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 7.2011 National bank compensation plans. Consistent with safe and sound banking practices and the compensation provisions of 12 CFR part 30, a national bank may adopt compensation plans, including, among others, the following: ( a ) *Bonus and profit-sharing plans.* A national bank may adopt a bonus or profit-sharing plan designed to ensure adequate remuneration of bank officers and employees.
( b ) *Pension plans.* A national bank may provide employee pension plans and make reasonable contributions to the cost of the pension plan.
( c ) *Employee stock option and stock purchase plans.* A national bank may provide employee stock option and stock purchase plans.
§ 366.3 Who cannot perform contractual services for the FDIC? We will not enter into a contract with you to perform a service or function on our behalf, if you or any person that owns or controls you, or any entity you own or control: ( a ) Has a felony conviction;
( b ) Was removed from or is prohibited from participating in the affairs of an insured depository institution as a result of a federal banking agency final enforcement action;
( c ) Has a pattern or practice of defalcation; or
( d ) Is responsible for a substantial loss to the Deposit Insurance Fund (or any predecessor deposit insurance fund).
[67 FR 69991, Nov. 20, 2002, as amended at 71 FR 20527, Apr. 21, 2006]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 79 (Monday, April 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 21736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10112]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-2162-000]


Tenaska Power Services Company; Notice of Filing

April 14, 2000.

    Take notice that on April 10, 2000, Tenaska Power Services Company 
(Tenaska), tendered for filing notice of withdrawal from the Western 
Regional Transmission Association.
    Tenaska requests that such withdrawal become effective immediately.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest 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). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before May 1, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-10112 Filed 4-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 1 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 2 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 3 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 4 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 5 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 6 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 7 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 8 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 9 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 10 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 11 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 12 of 13

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:23145-1   Filed:12/22/22   Entered:12/22/22 13:03:17    Desc:Exhibit A   Page 13 of 13
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3389 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3389

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To amend the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to 
permit Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards to be made to nonprofit 
                             organizations.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3389

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to 
permit Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards to be made to nonprofit 
                             organizations.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT.

    Section 17(c)(1) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act 
of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3711a(c)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
            ``(F) Nonprofit organizations.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 3, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 746.110 Administration of the appeal. ( a ) *Conduct of appeal.* Except as otherwise provided in § 746.111, the following procedures shall govern the conduct of an appeal to the Board: ( 1 ) *Review based on written record.* The appeal of a material supervisory determination shall be entirely based on the written record.
( 2 ) *Submission of written materials.* The Board or the Special Counsel to the General Counsel may request additional information to be provided in writing from either of the parties within 15 calendar days after the filing of an appeal, any amendments or supplementary information to the appeal documents by the insured credit union, or any responsive materials by the program office, whichever is later. The parties must submit the requested information to the Board or the Special Counsel within 15 calendar days of receiving a request for additional information.
( b ) *Decision.* The Board shall issue a decision within 90 calendar days, unless there is an oral hearing, from the date of receipt of an appeal by the Secretary of the Board. The decision by the Board shall be in writing, stating the reasons for the decision, and shall constitute a final agency action for purposes of chapter 7 of title 5 of the United States Code. Failure by the Board to issue a decision on an appeal within the 90-day period, unless there is an oral hearing, shall be deemed to be a denial of the appeal.
( c ) *Publication.* The Board shall publish its decisions on NCUA's Web site with appropriate redactions to protect confidential or exempt information. In cases where redaction is insufficient to prevent improper disclosure, published decisions may be presented in summary form. Published decisions may be cited as precedent. Publication shall include a synopsis of each appeal and a summary of the final result.
§ 650.55 Inventory, audit, and reports. ( a ) As soon as practicable after taking possession of the Corporation, the receiver shall take an inventory of the assets and liabilities as of the date possession was taken.
( b ) The receivership shall be audited on an annual basis by a certified public accountant selected by the receiver.
( c ) The receiver shall make an annual accounting or report, as appropriate, available for review upon request to any stockholder of the Corporation or any member of the public, with a copy provided to the Farm Credit Administration.
( d ) As soon as practicable after final distribution, the receiver shall send to each stockholder of record a report summarizing the disposition of the assets of the receivership and claims against the receivership.
§ 622.106 Service of subpoena and payment of witness fees. ( a ) *Service.* A subpoena may be served upon the person named therein by personal service or certified mail with a return receipt to the last known address of the person. Witnesses who are subpoenaed shall be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses in the district courts of the United States. The fees and mileage need not be tendered at the time a subpoena is served.
( b ) *Motions to quash.* Any person to whom a subpoena is directed may, prior to the time specified therein for compliance, but in no event more than 5 days after the date of service of such subpoena, apply to the FCA representative authorized in the order, or if unavailable to the Board, to quash or modify such subpoena, accompanying such application with a brief statement of the reasons therefor. The FCA representative, or the Board, may: ( 1 ) Deny the application;
( 2 ) Quash or revoke the subpoena;
( 3 ) Modify the subpoena; or
( 4 ) Condition the granting of the application on such terms as the FCA representative or the Board, determines in his, her, or its discretion, to be just, reasonable, and proper.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7739 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ALVIN WAYNE HARDESTY, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-98-299; CA-03-2246-AW)

Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 22, 2004

Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alvin Wayne Hardesty, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Odessa Palmer

Jackson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Alvin Wayne Hardesty, Jr., a federal prisoner, seeks to

appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his motion

filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and denying his motion for

reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Hardesty has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny Hardesty’s motion for a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:10:31 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:10:31 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:10:31 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:10:31 Desc: Main

Document Page 4 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:10:31 Desc: Main

Document Page 5 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:10:31 Desc: Main

Document Page 6 of 6