alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-2251

CHARLES WHITTINGTON; LINDA WHITTINGTON, his

wife; ASHLEY WHITTINGTON, his daughter,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION; ROBERT KENNEDY,

Chief Executive Officer of Union Carbide Corporation; METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,

District Judge. (CA-94-526)

Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: April 22, 1996

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Whittington, Linda Whittington, Ashley Whittington, Appellants Pro Se. Roger Allen Wolfe, Erin Elizabeth Magee, JACKSON &

KELLY, Charleston, West Virginia; Joseph Trovato, Allan M. Marcus,

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, New York, New York, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal from the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants on their action claiming that Union

Carbide Corporation wrongfully denied long term disability benefits

to Charles Whittington. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Whittington v. Union

Carbide Corp., No. CA-94-526 (S.D.W. Va. June 6, 1995). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

December 30, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

137277 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 137277 

 COA: 283544 

Oakland CC: 2002-187400-FH 

DOUGLAS HARRY GOODGER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 22, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

1215 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

December 30, 2008 

 Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 49 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con. Res.49
                                          Agreed to May 20, 1997        

                       One Hundred Fifth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
 the seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-seven

                          Concurrent Resolution

 
 Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the Greater Washington 
                             Soap Box Derby.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF SOAP BOX DERBY RACES ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

    The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Association (hereinafter in 
this resolution referred to as the ``Association'') shall be permitted 
to sponsor a public event, soap box derby races, on the Capitol Grounds 
on July 12, 1997, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate may jointly 
designate.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

    The event to be carried out under this resolution shall be free of 
admission charge to the public and arranged not to interfere with the 
needs of Congress, under conditions to be prescribed by the Architect 
of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board; except that the 
Association shall assume full responsibility for all expenses and 
liabilities incident to all activities associated with the event.

SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

    For the purposes of this resolution, the Association is authorized 
to erect upon the Capitol Grounds, subject to the approval of the 
Architect of the Capitol, such stage, sound amplification devices, and 
other related structures and equipment as may be required for the event 
to be carried out under this resolution.

SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

    The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are 
authorized to make any such additional arrangements that may be 
required to carry out the event under this resolution.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
BOBBY JINDAL GOVE RN O R 

# ~tate 

# of JLouisiana DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

## OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY September 18, 2015 Ron Curry, Administrator US EPA, Region
6 {6-RA) 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 Dallas, Texas 75202 RE
: State of Louisiana Recommendations

for Sulfur Dioxide Area Designations March 20, 2015 Updated Guidance Dear Mr. Curry:

PEGGY 

### M. HATCH S EC RET A R Y On March 20, 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) issued "Updated Guidance for Area Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard." This guidance was based upon
a consent decree entered into on March 2, 2015, in the US District Court of the Northern District of California by the US EPA and plaintiffs Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council (Case No. 13-cv-03953)

. States with indicated areas were given until September 18, 2015, to submit
a recommendation

to US EPA

. The first phase of designations, which will be promulgated
by July 2, 2016, address stationary sources that according
to the US EPA's Air Markets Database either emitted more than 16,000 tons of S0 2 or emitted more than 2,600 tons of S0 2 and had an average emission rate of 0.45 lbs

. of S0 2 /mmbtu or higher in 2012

. Three facilities
in Louisiana were identified
as fitting these categories: 1.) Nelson Industrial Steam Company- Calcasieu Parish; 2.) R S Nelson Generation Plant- Calcasieu Parish; and 3.) Dolet Hills Power Station- DeSoto Parish. Therefore,

in accordance with Section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990 the state of Louisiana, through the Louisiana Department
of Environmental Quality (LDEQ),

is pleased to propose recommendations
for the areas indicated as follows: • Based on technical reviews of available monitoring data and supportive modeling results that demonstrate the ambient air in the area surrounding the two facilities located
in Calcasieu Parish are in compliance with 2010 S0 2 NAAQS, the Department recommends

a designation
of 

### attainment. • Based on the lack of a qualified monitor
in the area surrounding the facility
in DeSoto Parish, LDEQ recommends

a designation
of 

### unclassifiable

. At this time, LDEQ is working with facility representatives

to properly site, install, and operate

a S0 2 monitor prior to the end of 2015

. In accordance with the Data Requirements Rule for the 2010 1-Hour S0 2 Primary NAAQS, air quality in DeSoto Parish would be addressed

in future area designations (80 FR 51052)

. Post Office Bo x 4301

• B a ton Rou g e, Louisian

a 70 8 21-4301

• Phone 225-219-395

3 • F ax 225-219-3971 www .d e q.l o ui s i a n a.govMr. Ron Curry Page 2 Documentation

to support the LDEQ's recommendation
for each parish can be found in the attached enclosures.

If you have any questions, please contact Cheryl Nolan, Administrator

of the Air Permits Division, at (225) 219-3408. C: Mark Hansen, Acting Associate Director of Air Programs Guy Donaldson, Chief Air Planning Section PMH/VHA/apdp Enclosures: Calcasieu Parish Supporting Document DeSoto Parish Supporting Document
---

WELLS
 FARGO
 
 Commercial Mortgage Servicing
 D1086-120, 12th Floor
 550 South Tryon Street
 Charlotte, NC 28202
 1-800-326-1334
 
 
 
 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Together We Will Go Far
 
 
 ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
 
 Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling  and  Servicing  Agreement  dated
 as  of  December  1,  2014,  by  and  among  GS  MORTGAGE  SECURITIES  CORPORATION  II,  as
 Depositor,  WELLS  FARGO  BANK  NATIONAL  ASSOCIATION,  as  Master  Servicer,  LNR
 PARTNERS,  LLC,  as  General  Special  Servicer,  CWCAPITAL  ASSET  MANAGEMENT  LLC,  as
 Cypresswood  Court  Shopping  Center  Special  Servicer,    PENTALPHA  SURVEILLANCE  LLC,  as
 Operating Advisor, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator and U.S.
 BANK  NATIONAL  ASSOCIATION,  as  Trustee,  with  respect  to  Commercial  Mortgage  Pass-
 Through    Certificates  Series  2014-GC26  (the  "Agreement").  Capitalized  terms  used  herein  not
 otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.
 
 Pursuant to Section 10.07 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of
 Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:
 
 1.
 
 A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from December 1,
 2014 through December 31, 2014 (the "Reporting Period"),  and of its performance
 per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and
 
 2.
 
 To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled
 all  of  its  obligations  under  the  Agreement  in  all  material  respects  throughout  the
 Reporting Period.
 
 
 
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 6th day of
 
 
 March 2015.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 /s/ Daniel Bober
 Daniel Bober
 Executive Vice President
 
 
 Wells Fargo Bank
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 270

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Acknowledging Taiwan’s desire to play a positive

curity for Taiwan’s democracy.peace and stability on the Taiwan Strait and sefirming the support of the American people forrole in the current Asian financial crisis and af-
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 270

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas the President of the United States has announced

he intends to travel to Beijing in June 1998 to discuss

the common interests of the United States and the People’s Republic of China;

Whereas the American people desire strong relations with the

people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait;
2

•HCON 270 EH

Whereas it is the policy of the United States Government to

take all necessary action to ensure peace and stability on

the Taiwan Strait, while continuing mutually beneficial

trade relations with Taiwan’s vibrant economy;

Whereas the American people have repeatedly welcomed and

supported democracy for the people of Taiwan;

Whereas Taiwan set an example for democratization in the

region having successfully held free and fair elections at

the local and national level and encouraging the development of democratic institutions;

Whereas the American people seek to promote economic stability and growth amidst the current financial turmoil in

the Asia-Pacific region;

Whereas Taiwan’s economy has weathered the current Asian

financial crisis better than others in the region;

Whereas Taiwan has proposed to use various means to help

stabilize the economies of many of its neighbors, including possibilities for action by the Asian Pacific Economic

Cooperation (APEC) forum of which it is a member;

Whereas Taiwan has expressed its willingness to provide financial assistance to its neighbors;

Whereas in the spring of 1996, the political leadership of the

People’s Republic of China used provocative military maneuvers, including missile launch exercises in the Taiwan

Strait, in an attempt to intimidate the people of Taiwan

during their historic, free, and democratic presidential

election;

Whereas officials of the People’s Republic of China refuse to

renounce the use of force against the people on Taiwan;
3

•HCON 270 EH

Whereas the use of force, and the threat to use force, by the

People’s Republic of China against Taiwan undermines

regional stability; and

Whereas a senior United States executive branch official has

again recently called upon the People’s Republic of China

to renounce any use of force against Taiwan: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that—

3 (1) the United States abides by all previous un4 derstandings of a ‘‘one China’’ policy and its abiding

5 interest in a peaceful resolution of the Taiwan

6 Straits issue; and

7 (2) the President of the United States should

8 seek, at the June summit meeting this year in Bei9 jing, a public renunciation by the People’s Republic

10 of China of any use of force, or threat to use force,

11 against democratic Taiwan.

Passed the House of Representatives June 9, 1998.

Attest:

Clerk.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

617 KA 10-01579
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHARLES KURKOWSKI, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THOMAS J. EOANNOU, BUFFALO (JEREMY D. SCHWARTZ OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MICHELLE L. CIANCIOSA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Thomas P. Franczyk, J.), rendered June 22, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a nonjury verdict, of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed and the matter is remitted to Erie County Court for proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a nonjury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [4] [reckless assault]), defendant contends that County Court erred in considering assault in the second degree as a lesser included offense of assault in the first degree (§ 120.10 [1] [intentional assault]). We reject that contention. Inasmuch as “the result and underlying conduct of [reckless assault] and [intentional assault are] identical and the only distinction between the two crimes [is] the mental state of the defendant, it is, within the meaning of CPL 1.20 [37] and CPL 300.50, impossible to commit the latter without concomitantly committing the former” ( People v Green , 56 NY2d 427, 432, rearg denied 57 NY2d 775). Thus, contrary to defendant’s further contentions, the conviction is not jurisdictionally defective and defense counsel was not ineffective in failing to object to the court’s consideration of the lesser included offense. Although we agree with defendant that the court failed to comply with CPL 320.20 (5) because it did not notify the parties that it intended to consider a lesser included offense until after summations, we conclude that such error is harmless ( see People v Harvey , 249 AD2d 951; People v Kloska , 191 AD2d 587; see generally People v Crimmins , 36 NY2d 230, 241-242). The theory of the defense was that defendant was not the perpetrator, a theory that applies equally to the offenses of assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree ( see Harvey , 249 AD2d 951; People v Peterkin , 195 AD2d 1015, lv denied 82 NY2d 758). Further,-2- 617 KA 10-01579

the court offered defense counsel the opportunity to reopen summations for the purpose of addressing the lesser included offense, thus alleviating any possible prejudice to defendant ( see Harvey , 249 AD2d 951; Peterkin , 195 AD2d 1015).

Finally, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe, particularly in light of the serious nature of defendant’s conduct and the severe and permanent injuries sustained by the victim.

Entered: April 29, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
(logo)CWCapital

ASSETMANAGEMENT

** **

** **

**Annual Statement asto Compliance**

 **For thePeriod of January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017**

 

 

**WFRBS 2014-C25**

 

 

Inaccordance with Item 1123 of Regulation AB and****with the requirementsdetailed in §11.12 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”) forthe above-mentioned CMBS pool, (the “CMBS Pool”), CWCapital Asset ManagementLLC (“CWCAM”), in its capacity as Special Servicer, is providing this Officer’sCertificate with respect to the following:

 

(A)      a review of CWCAM’s activities during the preceding calendar year or portionthereof (the “Reporting Period”) and of CWCAM’s performance under the Agreementhas been made under such officer’s supervision and; 

 

(B)      to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, CWCAM hasfulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

Shouldyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

 

Sincerely,

CWCapitalAsset Management LLC

 

/s/David B. Iannarone

DavidB. Iannarone

President

 

 

7501Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 500 West, Bethesda, MD 20814

www.cwcapital.com
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

          - [OMB Control No. 2900-0216]

# AGENCY:

Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published a collection of information notice in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Friday, March 25, 2022, that contained an error. The 60-day Public Comment notice identified the wrong type of review for the Agency Information Collection Activity. This document corrects the notice by replacing the error and providing the correction from an extension of a currently approved collection to a revision of a currently approved collection.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email                         *maribel.aponte@va.gov.*                         Please refer to “OMB Control No. 2900-0216” in any correspondence.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

      ( print page 18933)    
                    In FR Doc. 2022-06343, published on Friday, March 25, 2022, at 87 FR 17140, make the following corrections. On page 17140, in the                     **SUMMARY**                     section, and in the                     **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**                     section under “Type of Review,” replace the two instances of the word “extension” with the word “revision.”                

Dated: March 28, 2022.

By direction of the Secretary.

Maribel Aponte,

VA PRA Clearance Officer, Office of Enterprise and Integration/Data Governance Analytics, Department of Veterans Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2022-06792 Filed 3-30-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER WITHDRAWING MEDIATION ORDER

Cause number: 01-17-00934-CV

Style: Houston Copperwood Apts., L.P. v. Harris County Appraisal District

Date motion filed: December 29, 2017

Type of Motion: Objection to Mediation

Party filing motion: Appellee

It is ordered that Appellee=s objection to mediation is granted. We withdraw our 

Mediation Order dated December 19, 2017.

Judge's signature: /s/ Harvey Brown 

 X Acting individually Q Acting for the Court

 Panel consists of 

Date: January 12, 2018

* Absent emergency or a statement that the motion is unopposed, must wait ten days before acting on motion except for 

motion to extend time to file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3(a).

Note: Single justice may grant or deny any request for relief properly sought by motion, except in a civil case a single justice 

should not: (1) act on a petition for an extraordinary writ or (2) dismiss or otherwise determine an appeal or a motion 

for rehearing. TEX. R. APP. P. 10.4(a).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                     BD

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 JAN-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                      OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                              7,623,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                       2,230,000
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                         0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                                 5,360,000
<PP&E>                                              1,987,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     39,764,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                                0
<PAYABLES>                                          1,788,000
<REPOS-SOLD>                                                0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                         0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                     12,000
<LONG-TERM>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                2,000
<OTHER-SE>                                         25,358,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       39,764,000
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                   (723,000)
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                                  536,000
<COMMISSIONS>                                       1,097,000
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                         281,000
<FEE-REVENUE>                                       (282,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0
<COMPENSATION>                                      3,599,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (4,143,000)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (5,962,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (0.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (0.66)


</TABLE>