alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Anthony Sfarra,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the Wells FargoCommercial Mortgage Trust 2015-C28 (the "Exchange Act periodicreports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer,Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC,as Trust Advisor, CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as ServicingFunction Participant, National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing FunctionParticipant, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, NationalAssociation, as Primary Servicer for the Commerce Point I & II MortgageLoan, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, asSpecial Servicer for the Commerce Point I & II Mortgage Loan, Deutsche BankTrust Company Americas, as Trustee for the Commerce Point I & II MortgageLoan, Citibank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator for the Commerce Point I& II Mortgage Loan, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Custodian forthe Commerce Point I & II Mortgage Loan, and Situs Holdings, LLC, asOperating Advisor for the Commerce Point I & II Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated: March 20, 2019

 

 

/s/ Anthony Sfarra

 

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Clyde Foster, Defendant.

County Court, Kings County,

April 2, 1958.

*Clyde Foster,*defendant in person.

*Edward S. Silver, District Attorney (William I. Siegel*of counsel), for plaintiff.

Hyman Barshay, J.

The movant, and Melvin Johnson, were indicted for the crimes of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the first degree and assault in the second degree in one indictment, and for assault in the first and second degrees in another indictment. Each defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree under the former indictment and to assault in the second degree under the latter indictment with the stipulation that in the event either should prove to be a second felony offender, the District Attorney would consent to the withdrawal of the plea to robbery in the first degree and accept a plea of guilty to robbery in the second degree. Thereafter, only the defendant, Johnson, was adjudged a second felony offender and the agreement made with him was fully kept. On September 7, 1955, each defendant was sentenced to a term of not less than 15 nor more than 30 years under indictment number 1052/1955, and to a term of 5 to 10 years under indictment number 1198/1955, both sentences to run concurrently.

He now seeks to vacate and set aside his judgment of conviction on the ground that the District Attorney failed to file the plea statement as required by section 342-a of the Code of Criminal Procedure with respect to the codefendant, Melvin Johnson. This failure to comply with that section with respect to Johnson could not possibly affect this defendant’s status. This motion will be treated as an application in the nature of a writ of error *coram nobis.*

*286In *People*v. *D’Aula*(1 N T 2d 779), the court, over the objection of the District Attorney, permitted the defendant to plead guilty to a lesser degree of the crime charged in the indictment. The District Attorney did not file a statement pursuant to the requirement of section 342-a of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He moved to vacate the judgment of conviction on that ground. The Court of Appeals affirmed an order denying his application to set aside the judgment of conviction.

The movant likewise complains that the sentence imposed upon him was the same as that imposed upon his codefendant, Johnson, although the latter was a second felony offender. Punishment is a matter for the court. Each was a legal sentence. The motion is denied. Submit order. Let the District Attorney serve a copy of the order, when signed, tog*ether with notice of entry thereof, upon the defendant at the place where he is presently confined.
Case 2:22-cr-00046-Z-BR Document 275 Filed 10/17/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 626
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 11.1

                                   EASCO, INC.
                   CALCULATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE
                (NUMBERS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         THREE MONTHS ENDED                  SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                     ----------------------------      ---------------------------
                                                      JUNE 30,         JUNE 30,         JUNE 30,          JUNE 30,
                                                        1998             1997             1998              1997
                                                     -----------      -----------      ----------        ---------
                                                             (UNAUDITED)                       (UNAUDITED)

<S>                                                    <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>    
Weighted average shares of Common Stock
     issued                                             12,476           12,415           12,463           12,415

Less:  Treasury Stock outstanding                        2,005            2,005            2,005            2,005
                                                       -------          -------          -------          -------

Weighted average shares of Common Stock
     issued and outstanding                             10,471           10,410           10,458           10,410

Add:  Weighted average shares of Common
            Stock equivalents (stock options)              342              193              346              181
                                                       -------          -------          -------          -------

Weighted average shares of Common
    Stock and Common Stock equivalents
    outstanding                                         10,813           10,603           10,804           10,591
                                                       =======          =======          =======          =======

Net income                                             $ 2,132          $ 1,493          $ 5,540          $ 1,490
                                                       =======          =======          =======          =======


Basic earnings per share                               $  0.20          $  0.14          $  0.53          $  0.14
                                                       =======          =======          =======          =======
Diluted earnings per share                             $  0.20          $  0.14          $  0.51          $  0.14
                                                       =======          =======          =======          =======
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Dean
Witter Diversified Futures Fund Limited Partnership and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                     113,520,811
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  520,035<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             115,807,184<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               115,807,184<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           (5,866,227)<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,939,578
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,805,805)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (8,805,805)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (8,805,805)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables include interest receivable of $340,913, and due
from DWR $179,122.
<F2>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include net
unrealized gain on open contracts of $1,766,338.
<F3>Liabilities include redemptions payable of $2,114,889, accrued
management fee of $301,000, and administrative expenses payable
of $104,742.
<F4>Total revenue includes realized trading revenue of $(6,915,701),
net change in unrealized of $(17,951) and interest income of $1,067,425.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTFIERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCKDTVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

NO. 5:22-CR-055-01-H

KYELAN CHORDIAN KING,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF TTIE UMTED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry

of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent of the Defendant, and the Report and Recommendation

Conceming Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto

having been flled within fourteen (14) days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

$ 636(bX1), the undersigned District Judge is ofthe opinion that the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge conceming the Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is

hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty and

Defendant is hereby adjudged guilry.

Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court's scheduling order.

SO ORDERED.

Dated September ,2022.

JAMES SLEYHENDRIX

STATES DISTRICT ruDGE

Case 5:22-cr-00055-H-BQ Document 25 Filed 09/07/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 45
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

FUCIEN BREUS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-0629

[March 7, 2024]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Kirk C. Volker, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 50-2017-CF-003266-AXXX-MB.

Fucien Breus, Perry, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pablo Tapia, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
United States District Court 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

DIBY AKO § 

v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-CV-1751-S 

ARRIVA BEST SECURITY, INC., and : AMOIFO KOFFI § 

 ORDER 

The Court previously ordered Plaintiff Diby Ako to move for entry of a default and a 

default judgment against Defendants Arriva Best Security, Inc., and Amoifo Koffi. See ECF 

Nos. 12, 24. Plaintiff did so. See ECF Nos. 21, 28. On October 5, 2023, the United States 

Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court deny without prejudice Plaintiff's Motions for 

Default Judgment, see ECF No. 31, and the Court accepted that recommendation, see ECF No. 32. 

Defendants remain in default, and Plaintiff has not filed new motions for default judgment. 

Pursuant to Local Rule 55.1, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to move for a default judgment by no 

later than April 12, 2024. Failure to file the appropriate documents may result in dismissal of this 

case without further notice. 

SO ORDERED. 

SIGNED March 13, 2024. 

KAREN GREN SCHOLER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-01751-S Document 34 Filed 03/13/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 161
#### THORBUS v. STATE.

No. 25484.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 31, 1951.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 12, 1951.

*841Grant W. Smith, San Antonio, for appellant.

Austin F. Anderson, Cr. Dist. Atty., Richard J. Woods, Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., San Antonio, George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment on a charge of murder.

The record is before us without a statement of facts and there is but one bill of exception. This bill is based on the failure of the court to grant his application for a continuance. As affirmatively shown by the bill, the appellant had taken no steps to secure the evidence which he desired even though he had attorneys employed for several weeks.- It is indicated that he intended to secure evidence from the government on some defensive matter not specifically stated. What that evidence is and when he expected to obtain it is not revealed. The court properly overruled the motion.

The record brings nothing for our consideration and the judgment of the trial court is accordingly affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Cause No. DA 22 - 0424 SHAWN FOWLER Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MONTANA HIGHWAY PATROL Defendant/Appellant. **ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME** Pursuant to Appellant’s Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file its opening brief and good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant’s Motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s reply brief will be due on or before August 31 , 2023. No further extension s will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 25 2023

07/25/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0424
#### YORK v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Jan. 19, 1951.

Bertram & Bertram, Monticello, Flowers & Pritchard, Albany, for appellant.

A. E. Funk, Atty. Gen., H. D. Reed, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

Alvin York has filed a motion for an appeal from a judgment finding him and Bob Booher and Otto Lee guilty of illegally possessing liquor and sentencing each of them to a fine of $100 and 30 days in jail. For reasons hereinafter stated we think York’s motion for an appeal should be and it is sustained.

The evidence for both York and the Commonwealth shows conclusively that York was collaborating with a deputy sheriff when he took Booher in his cab to Tennessee to get some whiskey. Neither Lee, who was riding with Booher and York, nor York was arrested when the deputy sheriff found Booher with the whiskey in York’s car at the place where he and York had agreed the latter would stop. Under the evidence there was no more showing of intent to commit a crime upon the part of York than on the part of the deputy sheriff. Clearly this is a case of entrapment which comes within the scope of the opinion in the case of Scott v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 353, 197 S.W.2d 774.

Judgment reversed, with directions to set it aside, and for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 222 (Thursday, November 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29336]



[[Page 69297]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP01-80-000]


Majave Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

November 9, 2000.
    Take notice that on November 2, 2000, Mojave Pipeline Company 
(Mojave), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second 
Revised Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 236, with an effective 
date of December 3, 2000. Mojave also filed a revised Statement on 
Standards of Conduct.
    Majave states that this filing updates Mojave's Standards of 
Conduct and related tariff sheets.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining 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 in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in 
lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(ii) and the instructions on 
the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary
[FR Doc. 00-29336 Filed 11-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 3, 2016

NO. 03-14-00325-CV

Luther W. Cobb, Sr., Appellant

v.

Marilene F. Cobb, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 264TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on February 18, 2014. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in the trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment. Because 

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-11-00094-CV

MORRELL MASONRY SUPPLY, INC.,

Appellant

v.

JOE ODEN AND MARCIA ODEN,

Appellee

From the 87th District Court

Leon County, Texas

Trial Court No. NOT-09-379

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant has filed a “Motion to Dismiss Appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

It states that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement and that Appellant 

seeks dismissal of this appeal with costs to be assessed against the party incurring them. 

Dismissal of this appeal would not prevent a party from seeking relief to which it 

would otherwise be entitled. The motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed with 

each party to pay the costs in this behalf expended as they have been incurred.
Morrell Masonry Supply v. Oden Page 2

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and 

Justice Scoggins

Motion granted; appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed July 27, 2011

[CV06]
Case 4:22-cv-00262-P-BJ Document 2 Filed 04/05/22 Page 1 of 5 PageID 38
Case 4:22-cv-00262-P-BJ Document 2 Filed 04/05/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID 39
Case 4:22-cv-00262-P-BJ Document 2 Filed 04/05/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID 40
Case 4:22-cv-00262-P-BJ Document 2 Filed 04/05/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID 41
Case 4:22-cv-00262-P-BJ Document 2 Filed 04/05/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID 42
#### MANLEY v. STATE.

No. 22748.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 9, 1944.

Alex P. Pope, of Tyler, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The conviction is for the theft of an automobile of the value of $100. The punishment assessed is confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense charged. The indictment and all other matters of procedure appear to be in proper form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-20574

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FELIX HERNANDEZ-PEDRAZA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-98-CR-389-3

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

July 12, 2000

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Felix Hernandez-Pedraza appeals from a judgment entered

after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to transport illegal

aliens. He argues that the Government presented insufficient

evidence to support the conclusion that he knew the aliens were

in the United States illegally. We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Viewed in the light most favorable to

the verdict, the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. 

See United States v. Shabazz, 993 F.2d 431, 441 (5th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED.
September 15, 2016

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

AUNDRA B. JACKSON, Appellant

NO. 14-16-00616-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. The 

record indicates that the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the 

appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.