alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Filed 4/13/15 Siegel v. Fife CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

JEFFREY SIEGEL, as Trustee, etc.,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ELISABETH FIFE,

Objector and Appellant.

 B256224

 (Los Angeles County

 Super. Ct. No. BP135326)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, James A. 

Steele, Judge. Dismissed.

Law Offices of Phillip K. Fife and Phillip K. Fife for Objector and Appellant.

Orren & Orren and Tyna Thall Orren; Paul F. Cohen; and Leslie Barnett, for 

Plaintiff and Respondent.
2

The objector, Elisabeth Fife, appealed from a probate court order directing the 

successor trustee of the Betty Jean Brown Trust to proceed with a real property sale. The 

prior trustee, Michael Wilson, has now been succeeded as trustee by Jeffrey Siegel. The 

objector timely appealed the order. Mr. Wilson subsequently sought an order for relief

from the automatic stay of the real property sale. Mr. Wilson argued the appeal did not 

stay enforcement of the probate court’s sale order. Mr. Wilson cited Code of Civil 

Procedure section 917.4 and Probate Code section 1310, subdivision (b). The objector 

opposed Mr. Wilson’s petition. On March 6, 2014, following a hearing, the probate court 

granted Mr. Wilson’s petition and ordered sale of the property. The objector appealed the 

order directing the sale of the property, which is the subject of this appeal.

Mr. Siegel has moved to dismiss this appeal as moot. As Mr. Siegel notes in a

prior appeal, we had stayed the sale of real property located at Edgecliffe Drive pending 

further court order. (Wilson v. Fife (Apr. 22, 2014, B253746) [nonpub. order].) As to the 

prior appeal, we found in favor of the trustee and against objector as to the real property 

sale. We ordered our April 22, 2014 stay vacated. Thus we have now ordered the sale 

consummated. (Siegel v. Fife (2015) __ Cal.App.4th __, __.) There is now no further 

actual controversy pending before us. Accordingly, the objector’s current appeal is moot. 

(Eye Dog Foundation v. State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind (1967) 67 Cal.2d 536, 

541; Mercury Interactive Corp. v. Klein (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 60, 77-78.) 

The appeal is dismissed. Jeffrey Siegel, as trustee of the Betty Jean Brown Trust, 

is to recover his costs incurred on appeal from the objector, Elizabeth Fife.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

TURNER, P. J.

We concur:

MOSK, J. KRIEGLER, J.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1068 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1068

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that the temporary 
refundable portion of the child tax credit is not less than the payroll 
                      taxes paid by the taxpayer.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2019

   Mr. Budd introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that the temporary 
refundable portion of the child tax credit is not less than the payroll 
                      taxes paid by the taxpayer.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Working Families Relief Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY REFUNDABLE PORTION OF CHILD TAX CREDIT NOT LESS THAN 
              PAYROLL TAXES PAID BY TAXPAYER.

    (a) In General.--Section 24(h)(5)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(A) In general.--Subsection (d)(1)(A) shall be 
                applied without regard to paragraph (4) of this 
                subsection and the amount determined under subsection 
                (d)(1)(A) shall not exceed the greater of--
                            ``(i) $1,400, or
                            ``(ii) the excess of--
                                    ``(I) the taxpayer's social 
                                security taxes (as defined in 
                                subsection (d)(2)) for the taxable 
                                year, over
                                    ``(II) the credit allowed under 
                                section 32 for the taxable year.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2018.
                                 <all>
```
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0660. THOMAS WARREN ENTERPRISES, INC. v. SUNSET HILL

STONEWARE, LLC.

This case originated in magistrate court. After an adverse ruling, plaintiff

Thomas Warren Enterprises, Inc., appealed to the superior court. In the superior

court, Thomas Warren Enterprises filed an amended complaint. The superior court

entered summary judgment in favor of defendant Sunset Hill Stoneware, and Thomas

Warren Enterprises filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction.

Because the order at issue disposes of a de novo appeal from a magistrate court

decision, Thomas Warren Enterprises wasrequired to follow the discretionary appeal

procedures. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1); Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875

(581 SE2d 333) (2003). “Even when the superior court decides an issue that was not

raised or considered in the magistrate court, any appeal to this court must be pursuant

to the discretionary appeal procedure because the case reached the superior court

through a de novo appeal fromthe magistrate court.” Bullock, supra at 876. Itsfailure

to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

01/14/2015

January 14, 2015
**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**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Airbee Wireless, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Sundaresan Raja, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:





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





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





/s/
                Sundaresan RajaSundaresan
                RajaPrincipal
                Executive OfficerFebruary
                11, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           7,218
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     11,793
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,200
<PP&E>                                          37,085
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,965
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 198,808
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,755
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,579
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   198,808
<SALES>                                         95,887
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               131,894
<CGS>                                           58,713
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  106,454
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   289
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,475
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,974
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,147
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,827
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,827
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# Data

# New  Table 17

# Figure 17 Redesigned

Number of vessels

# Figure 17 table
391 A.2d 699

#### Commonwealth v. Shemanski, Appellant.

*631Submitted March 20,1978.

John J. Thomas, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant; Thomas J. Glenn, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, and Patrick J. Toole, Jr., District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

JACOBS, P. J., and SPAETH, J., agreed that the conviction should be affirmed, but would remand for resentencing. *Commonwealth v. Wertz,*252 Pa.Super. 584, 384 A.2d 933 (1978).

HOFFMAN, J., dissented.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MARKETING SERVICES GROUP, INC. AS OF AND
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>                      
<MULTIPLIER>                                              1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               Jun-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                  Jul-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                    Jun-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                       1.000
<CASH>                                            2,929,012
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5,037,167
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (32,329)
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  8,215,308
<PP&E>                                            1,135,360
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (389,577)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   25,391,272
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             8,026,138
<BONDS>                                           3,679,320
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            114,386
<OTHER-SE>                                       13,571,428
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     25,391,272
<SALES>                                          24,144,874
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 24,144,874
<CGS>                                             5,587,343
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5,587,343
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 22,131,362
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  529,521
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (5,267,723)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (109,373)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (5,377,096)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (5,377,096)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (2.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (2.85)
        


</TABLE>
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

VILMA M. WALKER and LORREN G. SOARES, Appellant s ,

v.

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
, Solely as Trustee f or Harborview Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Loan Pass

- Through Certificates, Series 2007

- 6, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 2760

[ December 5, 2018 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; John B. Bowman , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE 17

- 16368 (11)

.

Vilma M. Walker and Lorren G. Soares , Miramar, pro se

.

Kimberly S. Mello and Joseph H. Picone of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Tampa, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

. F la. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

C ONNER
, F ORST and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 21 - SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

BetzDearborn Hydrocarbon Process Group Inc., a Texas corporation.

BetzDearborn Paper Process Group Inc., a Florida corporation.

BetzDearborn Argentina S.A., an Argentinean corporation.

BetzDearborn Australia Pty Limited, an Australian corporation.

BetzDearborn Ges. mbH, an Austrian corporation.

BetzDearborn N.V., a Belgian corporation.

Dearborn International Ltda., a Brazilian corporation.

BetzDearborn Canada, Inc., a Canadian corporation.

BetzDearborn de Chile Ltda., a Chilean corporation.

BetzDearborn Colombia S.A., a Colombian corporation.

BetzDearborn Denmark A/S, a Danish corporation.

BetzDearborn de Ecuador S.A., an Ecuadorian corporation.

BetzDearborn OY, a Finnish corporation.

BetzDearborn S.A., a French corporation.

BetzDearborn GmbH, a German corporation.

BLI-DB HK, Inc., a Delaware corporation.

BetzDearborn India Private Limited, an Indian corporation.

PT BetzDearborn Persada, an Indonesian corporation.

BetzDearborn Ireland Limited, an Irish corporation.

BetzDearborn S.p.A., an Italian corporation.

BetzDearborn Korea Ltd., a Korean corporation.

Betz (Malaysia) Sdn. BHD, a Malaysian corporation.

BetzDearborn de Mexico S.A. de C.V., a Mexican corporation.

BetzDearborn B.V., a Dutch corporation.


<PAGE>

BetzDearborn Norge A/S, a Norwegian corporation.

BetzDearborn del Peru S.A., a Peruvian corporation.

BetzDearborn Portuguesa, Lda., a Portuguese corporation.

BetzDearborn Pte. Ltd., a Singapore corporation.

BetzDearborn South Africa (Pty) Ltd., a South Africa corporation.

BetzDearborn Iberica S.A., a Spanish corporation.

BetzDearborn AB, a Swedish corporation.

BetzDearborn Taiwan Limited, a Taiwanese corporation.

BetzDearborn (Thailand) Co. Ltd., a Thailand corporation.

BetzDearborn de Uruguay S.A., a Uruguayan corporation.

BetzDearborn Limited, a United Kingdom corporation.

BetzDearborn Venezuela C.A., a Venezuelan corporation.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 24
                                                                      ----------

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each individual whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints John L. Coughlin, Stephen D. Fantone and
John T. Lynch, and each of them, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent
with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name,
place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign this Registration Statement
on Form 10-KSB, and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the same with
all exhibits thereto, and all documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and
every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in
person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and
agents or either of the, or their or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully
do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

     Signature                Title           Date
     ---------                -----           ----

JOHN L. COUGHLIN
_______________________    Director        December 30, 1996
John L. Coughlin

SAMUEL O. RAYMOND
_______________________    Director        December 30, 1996
Samuel O. Raymond

A. THEODORE MOLLEGEN, JR.
_______________________    Director        December 30, 1996
A. Theodore Mollegen, Jr.

THURMAN F. NAYLOR
_______________________    Director        December 30, 1996
Thurman F. Naylor

STEPHEN D. FANTONE
_______________________    Director        December 30, 1996
Stephen D. Fantone
| (1)   | the      annual Report on Form 10-K of Secured Diversified Investment, Ltd., for      the year ended December 31, 2008 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 annual Report on Form 10-K for the year      ended December 31, 2008, fairly presents in all material respects,      the financial condition and results of operations of Secured Diversified      Investment, Ltd. |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/Robert      Saucier       |
|--------|------------------------------|
|   |                         |
| Name:  | Robert      Saucier          |
|   |                         |
| Title: | Chief      Executive Officer |
|   |                         |
| Date:  | March 31,      2009     |
EXHIBIT 31.2
            Section 302 Certification of Chief Financial Officer
                               CERTIFICATIONS

I, Munjit Johal, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Secured
Diversified Investment, Ltd.;

     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this annual 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
annual report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and the registrant's have:

     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
     disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
     supervision, 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 annual report our conclusions
     about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as
     of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on such
     evaluation; and
     c) Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant's
     internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
     registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
     fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
     affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
     registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

     5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, 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 and material weaknesses in the design
     or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
     reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
     record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
     other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
     internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 17, 2004

/s/ Munjit Johal
-----------------------------
    Munjit Johal
    Chief Financial Officer