alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

911 

CA 11-00508 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ. 

 

JOHN VISCOSI AND GEORGINA VISCOSI, 

PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

PREFERRED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, 

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

O’SHEA MCDONALD & STEVENS, LLP, ROME (TIMOTHY BRIAN O’SHEA OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

GUSTAVE J. DETRAGLIA, JR., UTICA, FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (Anthony

F. Shaheen, J.), entered September 2, 2010. The order, insofar as

appealed from, denied the motion of defendant for summary judgment

dismissing the complaint. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law without costs, defendant’s motion is

granted and the complaint is dismissed. 

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action seeking damages for

an alleged breach of an insurance policy issued by defendant. We note

at the outset that, although defendant purports to appeal from “each

and every part” of the order, it is not aggrieved by that part of the

order denying plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on the

complaint and thus may not appeal therefrom (see CPLR 5511). We agree

with defendant that Supreme Court erred in denying its motion for

summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see generally Government

Empls. Ins. Co. v Kligler, 42 NY2d 863, 864), and we therefore reverse

the order insofar as appealed from. 

The policy excluded coverage for loss “to the inside of a

building or the property contained in a building caused by rain, snow,

[or] sleet . . . unless the direct force of wind or hail damages the

building causing an opening in a roof or wall and the rain, snow, [or]

sleet . . . enters through [that] opening . . . .” In support of its

motion, defendant submitted the deposition testimony of plaintiff John

Viscosi in which he testified that the damage at issue was caused by

water “that had seeped” into the ceiling of several rooms in the

covered premises, and he specifically denied that either wind or hail

created an opening in the building. We also agree with defendant that

the ceiling did not collapse within the meaning of the policy, which
-2- 911 

CA 11-00508 

specifically states that “any part of a building that is standing is

not considered to be in a state of collapse even if it shows evidence

of cracking, bulging, sagging, bending, leaning, settling, shrinkage

or expansion.” Here, the record establishes that the ceiling did not

“abrubt[ly] fall[] down or cav[e] in” but, rather, the ceiling was

noticeably bowed for several months before plaintiffs had it

demolished. In light of our determination, defendant’s remaining

contentions are academic.

Entered: September 30, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court
November 29, 2015 

Dear Mr. June: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket 

No. FAA-2015-3014). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) to process your petition. 

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) 

which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to 

proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operation 

please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the 

requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking 

number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process 

your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 11/12/15. If we do 

not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-4712. 

Sincerely, 

/S/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst
|                                                                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History:                                                                                               
|                                                                                                            
|New Mexico Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                            
|                                                                                                            
|New Mexico Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 862    | 292    | 993    | 831    | 1,309  | 1,171  | 6,390  | 284    | 185    | 252   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 150    | 992    | 57     | 612    | 13     | 2,425  | 330    | 7,452  | 1,447  | 63    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 329    | 291    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
Exhibit 10.3


 


SPRINGWATER SPECIAL SITUATIONS CORP.


c/o Graubard Miller


405 Lexington Ave, 11th Floor


New York, New York 10174


 


August 25, 2021


 


Graubard Miller


405 Lexington Ave, 11th Floor


New York, New York 10174


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter will confirm our
agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement (the “Registration
Statement”) for the initial public offering (the “IPO”) of securities of Springwater Special Situations
Corp. (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company of an initial
business combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date
hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Date”), Graubard Miller shall make available to the Company certain
office space and administrative and support services as may be required by the Company from time to time, situated at 405 Lexington Avenue,
11th Floor, New York, New York 10174 (or any successor location) free of charge.


 


[Signature Page
Follows]


 




    


     


    

 


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	SPRINGWATER SPECIAL SITUATIONS CORP.
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Martin Gruschka
	 	 	Name:	Martin Gruschka
	 	 	Title:	Chief Executive Officer


 


	AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:	 
	 	 
	GRAUBARD MILLER	 
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Jeffrey M. Gallant	 
	 	Name:	Jeffrey M. Gallant	 
	 	Title:	Partner	 





 


 


[Signature Page
to Administrative Services Agreement]
|                                                                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                                 
|View History:                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                                     
|Pennsylvania Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                     
|                                                                                                                     
|Pennsylvania Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 1      | 0      | 12    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 83     | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 6      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION 

JONATHAN VILLARREAL, 

Individually and derivatively on behalf 

Of ZROBLACK, LLC 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

JOHN SAENZ, et al., 

Defendants. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

 No. 5:20-cv-00571-OLG 

STIPULATION AND AGREED ORDER FOR DEADLINES RELATED TO 

DEFENDANTS’ REPLIES TO (I) PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS GUNN, 

LEE & CAVE, P.C.’S AND MIGUEL VILLARREAL’S SECOND RULE 12(B)(6) 

MOTION TO DISMISS [DKT. 45] AND 

(II) PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT JOHN SAENZ’S RULE 12(B)(6)

MOTION TO DISMISS [DKT 46] 

CAME ON FOR CONSIDERATION the request by Defendants JOHN SAENZ, 

MIGUEL VILLARREAL, JR., and GUNN, LEE, & CAVE, P.C. (“Defendants”) to enter a 

Stipulation and Agreed Order Related to the deadline for Defendants to file Replies to (I) Response 

to Defendants Gunn, Lee & Cave, P.C.’s and Miguel Villarreal’s Second Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to 

Dismiss [Dkt 45] and (II) Plaintiffs’ Response to John Saenz’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss 

[Dkt 46] (together, the “Responses”). The Court, having considered the Parties’ stipulation and 

representations and the record in this case, finds that the request is well-taken and should be 

Granted. It is therefore 

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the deadline for Defendants to file 

Replies to the Responses shall be March 11, 2021. 

[Signature Page Follows] 

Case 5:20-cv-00571-OLG Document 49 Filed 03/03/21 Page 1 of 2
L & B 03554/0014/L1914432.DOCX/ 2 

Dated March __, 2021. 

_________________________________________ 

RICHARD FARRER 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

STIPULATED AND AGREED TO BY 

/s/ Natalie F. Wilson 

LANGLEY & BANACK, INC. 

745 E. Mulberry, Suite 700 

San Antonio, Texas 78212 

(210) 736-6600 Telephone

(210) 735-6889 Telecopier

Email: nwilson@langleybanack.com

GEORGE H. SPENCER, JR. 

State Bar No. 18921001 

NATALIE F. WILSON 

State Bar No. 24067769 

Counsel to MIGUEL VILLARREAL, JR., 

and GUNN, LEE & CAVE, PC 

/s/ David A. Vanderhider (with permission) 

DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC 

112 E. Pecan Street - Suite 1800 

San Antonio, TX 78205 

210-554-5484

Fax: 210-226-8395

DAVID A. VANDERHIDER 

State Bar No. 24070787 

RYAN J. SULLIVAN 

State Bar No. 24102548 

Counsel to Defendant JOHN SAENZ 

/s/ Joseph L. Lanza (with permission) 

VETHAN LAW FIRM 

11459 Huebner Road, Suite 101 

San Antonio, TX 78230 

210-824-2220

Fax: 713-526-2230

CHARLES M.R. VETHAN 

State Bar No. 00791852 

JOSEPH L. LANZA 

State Bar No. 00784447 

STEVEN A. COSTELLO 

State Bar No. 240672677 

Counsel to PLAINTIFFS 

3

Case 5:20-cv-00571-OLG Document 49 Filed 03/03/21 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31

                                CERTIFICATION


             I, Steve Bailey, certify that:

             1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all
             reports on Form 8-K containing distribution and servicing reports
             filed in respect of periods included in the year covered by this
             annual report, of CWMBS, Inc., CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust
             2005-HYB2;

             2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken
             as a whole, 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 as of the last day of the
             period covered by this annual report;

             3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing
             information required to be provided to the trustee by the master
             servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement,
             for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

             4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
             master servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar,
             agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance
             review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in
             the reports, the master servicer has fulfilled its obligations
             under that agreement; and

             5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to
             the master servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing
             standards based upon the report provided by an independent public
             accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the
             Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or
             similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or
             similar, agreement, that is included in these reports.

             In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
             information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
             The Bank of New York, as Trustee and National City Mortgage
             Company.


             Date: March 24, 2006


                                                       /s/ Steve Bailey
                                                       ------------------------
                                                       Steve Bailey
                                                       Senior Managing Director
EXHIBIT 12.1



RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES



The following table sets forth the ratio of earnings to fixed charges for Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co. and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries for each of the periods indicated. We calculated the ratio of earnings to fixed charges by dividing earnings by total fixed charges. Earnings are defined as income before income taxes and minority interest plus fixed
charges less preferred dividend requirements of our consolidated subsidiary. Fixed charges are defined as the sum of interest expensed plus amortized capitalized expenses related to indebtedness plus an estimate of the interest within rental expense
plus preferred dividend requirements of our consolidated subsidiary.



|                                   |  |                         |  |      |  |      |  |      |  |     
|---------------------------------- |  | ----------------------- |  | ---- |  | ---- |  | ---- |  | ----
|                                   |  | Year Ended December 31,
|                                   |  | 2004                    |  | 2003 |  | 2002 |  | 2001 |  | 2000
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges |  | 2.5                     |  | 3.6  |  | 2.7  |  | 2.9  |  | 1.6
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5397 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on Pyraclostrobin. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. GRAVES of Missouri introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on Pyraclostrobin. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PYRACLOSTROBIN. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.01.21 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Pyraclostrobin) is amended by striking the date in the ef7 fective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

10 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

11 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald Williams, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Orenstein, J.), rendered April 4, 1988, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Prior to the acceptance by the Trial Judge of his plea of *492guilty, the defendant, through counsel, waived "any decided or undecided motions, applications or hearings”. By so withdrawing his pretrial motions, the defendant waived his right to appellate review of the Trial Judge’s suppression determination and is precluded from now raising suppression issues on appeal *(see, People v Kafka,*128 AD2d 895; *People v Feingold,*125 AD2d 587; *People v Colarusso,*103 AD2d 848; *see also, People v Williams,*36 NY2d 829, *cert denied*423 US 873).

The defendant also contends that he was denied his right to counsel of his own choosing because the Trial Judge failed to grant a continuance to permit him to substitute retained counsel for his assigned counsel. Whether such a continuance should be granted is largely at the discretion of the Trial Judge, and depends upon the particular facts of the case *(see, People v Arroyave,*49 NY2d 264, 271). The defendant’s request was made on the eve of trial, and the defendant had had a reasonable opportunity to retain counsel of his own choosing during the approximately eight months between his indictment and the time of trial. Under the circumstances presented here, the Trial Judge did not improvidently exercise his discretion in denying the defendant’s request *(see, People v Tineo,*64 NY2d 531; *People v Arroyave, supra; People v Dixon,*127 AD2d 785).

Moreover, we note that our review of the plea allocution indicates that the defendant pleaded guilty voluntarily and that the plea satisfied the requirements of *People v Harris*(61 NY2d 9).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Eiber, J. P., Harwood, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
|                                                                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                         
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                                                     
|View History:                                                                                                            
|                                                                                                                         
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Percentage of Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves from Greater than 200 Meters Deep (Percent)
|                                                                                                                         
|                                                                                                                         
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Percentage of Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves from Greater than 200 Meters Deep (Percent)
|                                                                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 12.1   | 13.2   | 17.3   | 20.6   | 22.7   | 26.3   | 28.1   | 29.6  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 32.5   | 41.4   | 41.6   | 44.6   | 44.5   | 47.3   | 44.8   | NA     |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023