alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Arthur Andersen L.L.P
100 Peabody Place, Suite 1100
Memphis, TN 38103-3625

Dear Sirs:

As of and for the year ended December 31, 2000, First Horizon Home Loan
Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiary, First Tennessee Mortgage Services,
Inc. (the "Company") has complied in all material respects, except for the
matters disclosed in Exhibit I, with the minimum servicing standards set forth
in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers. As of and for this same period, the Company had in
effect a fidelity bond policy in the amount of $70,000,000 and an errors and
omissions policy in the amount of $50,000,000.



                                        ----------------------------
                                        Peter F. Makowiecki
                                        Chief Financial Officer

                                        February 16, 2001







<PAGE>




                                                                       EXHIBIT I
                                                                       ---------


Matter #1:

The Company is required to maintain a loan servicing file for each of the loans
it services. During an inventory of files in prior years, the Company noted
several missing files.

Management Corrective Action:

The Company maintains original collateral documentation files with the document
custodians. For the existing portfolio, internal loan servicing files will be
recreated and imaged as necessary. Previously, the Company implemented front-end
imaging technology which has, and will continue to, substantially reduce the
loss of internal documents in the future.

Matter #2:

The Company is required to perform reconciliations on a monthly basis for all
custodial accounts and related bank clearing accounts. Seven of 24
reconciliations tested had reconciling items greater than 90 calendar days of
their original identification.

Management Corrective Action:

The Company has established a policy ensuring all reconcilements have
appropriate documentation. Also, the Company has a system of management
reporting that emphasizes accounts with outstanding reconciling items and the
specific age of those items. These reports are submitted to management on a
monthly basis. Of the seven reconcilements, six are clearing accounts for which
procedures have been established to monitor check clearing activity by payees
who have not cashed their checks. For escrow clearing accounts, the Company
monitors checks not cashed and follows state escheat procedures. For investor
clearing accounts, the Company monitors investor guidelines for certificate
holders who do not cash their checks.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 27, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 93570-93571]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27771]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF25-1-000]

Western Area Power Administration; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on November 15, 2024, Western Area Power 
Administration submitted a tariff filing per 300.10: RMR_LAP_WAPA212-
20241115 to be effective January 1, 2025.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken but will

[[Page 93571]]

not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person 
wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion 
to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must 
be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, 
it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on 
persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, 
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link 
at https://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail 
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in 
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports 
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission 
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, 
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access 
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For 
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as 
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is 
encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or [email protected].
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on December 15, 2024.

    Dated: November 20, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-27771 Filed 11-26-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CHARLES W. COOK, III

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 20

- 741

LT Case No. 2014

- CF

- 000195

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

.

________________________________/

Decision filed May 30, 2023

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court

fo r St. Johns County

, Howard M. Maltz , Judge.

C harles W. Cook, III, Blountstown,

pro se.

A shley Moody, Att orney General,

Tallahass ee, and Allison L. Morris,

Assistant Atto r ney General , Daytona

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WALLIS

, JAY and BOATWRIGHT , JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           42,008,344
<SECURITIES>                                        605,696
<RECEIVABLES>                                         7,782
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 42,764,934
<PP&E>                                           10,888,562
<DEPRECIATION>                                    8,644,147
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   55,778,901
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1,773,010
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            200,048
<OTHER-SE>                                       53,805,843
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     55,778,901
<SALES>                                              35,402
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     35,402
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  2,077,796
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    3,679
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (1,678,482)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (1,678,482)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (1,678,482)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (.08)


</TABLE>
#### Joyce A. Geraci, Respondent, v Creative Leasing Concepts, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[631 NYS2d 319]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered January 18, 1995, which granted plaintiffs motion to reargue a prior order which, *inter alia,*granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and, upon reargument, denied such mo*498tion for summary judgment, and order, same court and Justice, entered April 6, 1995, which denied defendant’s motion to compel the depositions of plaintiff and nonparty witnesses, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s motion for reargument was timely *(see, Delcrete Corp. v Kling,*67 AD2d 1099), and properly granted. The motion for summary judgment was properly denied on the ground that issues of fact exist including, *inter alia,*whether a prospective purchaser produced by plaintiff had reached agreement on the essential terms of the contract with the seller *(see, Fogel v Rob Realty,*204 AD2d 135), such that plaintiff was entitled to a brokerage commission *(see, Mosely Assocs. v New Yorker Mag.,*135 AD2d 456). The court did not improperly refuse to compel the depositions defendants seek absent a reasonable excuse for not having undertaken such activity before the case was put on the calendar or a showing of subsequently developing unusual or unanticipated circumstances *(see, Price v Bloomingdale’s,*166 AD2d 151). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,283
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  517,070
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         607,528
<DEPRECIATION>                                 153,767
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,026,642
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           36,225
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       511,510
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,026,642
<SALES>                                        163,696
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               163,696
<CGS>                                          150,167
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  160,763
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 689
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,771
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,491
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,280
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,280
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1679 

To ensure that the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s current efforts 

to modernize its grant management system includes applicant accessibility and transparency, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 22, 2017 

Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana (for himself and Mr. SIRES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To ensure that the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s current efforts to modernize its grant management 

system includes applicant accessibility and transparency, 

and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘FEMA Accountability, 

5 Modernization and Transparency Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENTS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal 

8 Emergency Management Agency shall ensure the ongoing 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 1679 IH

1 modernization of the grant systems for the administration 

2 of assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

3 and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 

4 includes the following: 

5 (1) An online interface, including online assist6 ance, for applicants to complete application forms, 

7 submit materials, and access the status of applica8 tions. 

9 (2) Mechanisms to eliminate duplication of ben10 efits. 

11 (3) If appropriate, enable the sharing of infor12 mation among agencies and with State, local, and 

13 tribal governments, to eliminate the need to file mul14 tiple applications and speed disaster recovery. 

15 (4) Any additional tools the Administrator de16 termines will improve the implementation of this sec17 tion. 

18 (b) IMPLEMENTATION.—To the extent practicable, 

19 the Administrator shall deliver the system capabilities de20 scribed in subsection (a) in increments or iterations as 

21 working components for applicant use. 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS

3 

•HR 1679 IH

1 SEC. 3. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED. 

2 No additional funds are authorized to carry out the 

3 requirements of this Act. Such requirements shall be car4 ried out using amounts otherwise authorized. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
April 1, 1975 

The Honorable James E. Nugent 

Chairman, House Transportation Committee 

P. 0. Box 2910 

Austin, Texas 78767 

Dear Chairman Nugent: 

Opinion No. H-571 

Re: Whether a county 

auditor must be appointed 

in Kerr County. 

At the direction of the House Transportation Committee, you have 

requested our opinion concerning whether a county auditor must be appointed 

in Kerr County. 

Article 1645, V. T. C. S., provides: 

In any county having a population of 35, 000 

inhabitants or over according to the Last 

preceding Federal Census, or having a tax 

be appointed every two years an auditor of 

accounts and finances, the title of said 

office to be County Auditor,. . . 

statute 

County 

In Attorney Genera,1 Opinions WW,-1142 (1961), and G-4828(1942), thi,s 

was held to be mandat:ory. Since we have been informed that Kerr 

had a tax valuation of $51, b22, 707 in 1974, a county auditor clearly 

must be appointed pursuant t,o the procedure provided in artic,le 1647, V. T. C. S. 

Article 1645a-9, which purports Tao prohibit the appoimment of a county auditor in counties of a populat:ion less than 25, 500 except upon petition of the 

commissi,oners court is inapplicab:lle, for article lb45 is of subsequent enactment. Popham vi Pat,terson, 51 S. W. 2d 680, 684 (Tex. Sup. 1932). 

SUMMARY 

A county auditor must be appointed for Kerr County. 

Attorrwy General of Texas 

p. 2555 
The Honorable James E. Nugent - Page 2 (H-571) 

Opinion Committee 

jwb 

p. 2556
Exhibit 10.1


 


 


AMENDMENT NO.
3


TO


CINEDIGM CORP.
2017 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN


 


AMENDMENT NO. 3,
dated as of October 23, 2020 (this "Amendment"), to the 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (as amended, the "Plan")
of Cinedigm Corp., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation").


 


WHEREAS, the Corporation
maintains the Plan, effective as of August 31, 2017; and


 


WHEREAS, the Board
of Directors of the Corporation deems it to be in the best interest of the Corporation and its stockholders to amend the Plan in
order to increase the maximum number of shares of the Corporation's Class A Common Stock, par value $.001 per share, which may
be issued and sold under the Plan from 4,098,270 shares to 14,098,270 shares.


 


NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 


		1.	The first sentence of Section 4.1(a) shall be revised and amended to read as follows:



 


"The maximum
number of Shares available for issuance to Participants under this Plan, inclusive of Shares issued and Shares underlying outstanding
awards granted on or after the Effective Date, is 14,098,270 Shares, which includes 128,270 unused Shares carried over from the
Existing Incentive Plan."


 


		2.	This Amendment shall be effective as of the date first set forth above.



 


		3.	In all respects not amended, the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed and remains in full force and effect.



 


 





	 	CINEDIGM CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By:
	/s/ Christopher
J. McGurk
	 	Name:	Christopher
J. McGurk
	 	Title:	Chief
Executive Officer
No. 86-5266.

#### Hines *v.*Alabama.

Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*and certiorari granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Griffith*v. *Kentucky, ante,*p. 314.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1517 

To require the Governor of a State to submit to the Attorney General 

an annual report on the number of individuals who represented themselves in court in criminal matters or juvenile delinquency matters, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2017 

Mr. DEUTCH (for himself and Mr. CONYERS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To require the Governor of a State to submit to the Attorney 

General an annual report on the number of individuals 

who represented themselves in court in criminal matters 

or juvenile delinquency matters, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Status of the Sixth 

5 Amendment Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDING. 

7 Congress finds that the Sixth Amendment to the 

8 Constitution of the United States provides that ‘‘In all 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1517 IH

1 criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to 

2 . . . have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.’’. 

3 SEC. 3. REPORT ON INDIVIDUALS WHO REPRESENT THEM4 SELVES IN CRIMINAL MATTERS OR JUVENILE 

5 DELINQUENCY MATTERS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Beginning on the date that is 3 

7 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and an8 nually thereafter, the Governor of each State that receives 

9 a grant from the Office of Justice Programs shall submit 

10 to the Attorney General a report which contains, at a min11 imum, the information described in subsection (b)(1) for 

12 each of the categories described in subsection (b)(2) for 

13 the previous year for that State. 

14 (b) CONTENTS OF REPORT.— 

15 (1) INFORMATION DESCRIBED.—The informa16 tion described in this paragraph is as follows: 

17 (A) The number of charges for which an 

18 individual was prosecuted. 

19 (B) The number of charges for which a de20 fendant waived his or her right to counsel. 

21 (C) The number of charges for which a de22 fendant was represented in court by counsel 

23 who was publicly appointed. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1517 IH

1 (D) The number of charges for which a de2 fendant was represented in court by counsel 

3 who was not publicly appointed. 

4 (2) OFFENSE CATEGORIES DESCRIBED.—The 

5 categories of offenses described in this paragraph 

6 are as follows: 

7 (A) Criminal offenses for which a term of 

8 imprisonment of more than one year may be 

9 imposed. 

10 (B) Criminal offenses for which a term of 

11 imprisonment of one year or less may be im12 posed, including misdemeanors, traffic viola13 tions, and violations of municipal ordinances. 

14 (C) Acts of juvenile delinquency or juvenile 

15 status offenses for which any term of detention 

16 may be imposed. 

17 (c) AVAILABILITY OF REPORTS.—The Attorney Gen18 eral shall make the reports required under subsection (a) 

19 publicly available on the Internet website of the Depart20 ment of Justice. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 20-1032

___________________________ F. Allan Midyett, M.D. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v. Robert Wilkie, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________ Submitted: August 26, 2020 Filed: August 31, 2020 [Unpublished]

____________ Before ERICKSON, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. F. Allen Midyett appeals after the district court 1 dismissed his employment discrimination action as barred by res judicata, based on the dismissals of his prior

1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.employment discrimination suits related to the same events. The district court also

denied his post-judgment motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), in which Midyett asserted that res judicata was inapplicable because the dismissals of his prior suits were based on fraud. Because the only order of the district court designated in Midyett’s notice of appeal was the order denying his post-judgment motion, we conclude that the scope of this appeal is limited to review of that order; and we further conclude that there was no abuse of discretion in the denial of post-judgment relief. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1) (notice of appeal must, inter alia, designate judgment, order, or part thereof being appealed); Chambers v. City of Fordyce, Ark., 508 F.3d 878, 881-82 (8th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (appeal from denial of Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion does not raise underlying judgment for review, but only question of whether district court abused its discretion in ruling on motion); E.F. Hutton & Co. v. Berns, 757 F.2d 215, 216-17 (8th Cir. 1985) (to prevail on Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion based on fraud, movant must establish by clear and convincing evidence that adverse party engaged in fraud or other misconduct that prevented movant from fully and fairly presenting his case). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the motion filed by the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs seeking to supplement the record.

______________________________

-2-