alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Commentary: Beauty, Balance and Harmony in Native American traditions

/ Published Nov. 4, 2021
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
The 2021 theme for Native American/Alaskan Native Heritage Month emphasizes the rich traditions that form the foundations of social development combined with spirituality as the life blood of a life of resilience. This narrative represents one in a series of articles celebrating Native American culture. We begin with the Ndee term *Gozho* meaning beauty, balance and harmony. Ndee comes from an Apache word meaning “the people,” and is one of the names Apache people use to refer to themselves in their own language. In the 2009 article Theory and Practice Understanding Native American Healing Practices by Christopher Rybak and Amanda Decker-Fitts, they stated, “Native American healing practices exemplify key cultural perspectives and influence the identity development of Native American individuals.”

An example of healing practices is the use of yellow cattail pollen for protection. Although the use of cattail pollen is largely outside the mainstream of Western psychological tenets, they can have significant impact on the sense of well-being for Ndee communities. Native American cultural specialists have demonstrated that traditions and perspectives similar to those associated with cattail pollen are necessary for continued community well-being. Further these traditions reinforce and amplify the past as present, which immortalize the cyclical and reciprocal nature of the ways Ndee communities have related to *Nígosdzán* – Mother Earth. 

This tenet is both practiced and passed down in tradition as evidenced in archaeological research on Ndee lands affirming that healing and promoting health is crucial to overall individual and community well-being. The sacred pollen of the cattail has been used by the Apaches for many ceremonies including the Puberty Ceremonial, Blessing and Cradleboard ceremonies, and during special church services or weddings.  Cattail pollen is also eaten, as are many of the other parts of this unusual, but edible plant.

***Editor’s Note:** The National American Indian Heritage Month observance has its roots in Public Law 99-471. Over several years the observance was moved to different months but in 1990 Public Law 101-343 set the monthlong observance in November. Please note that the title of this observance varies between agencies. The Department of Defense’s Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute uses the title set forth in the Public Laws, and that title is used at the beginning of this article to signify the DOD-wide observance. By Presidential Proclamation, the month is also observed as National Native American Heritage Month. In 1924, Congress enacted the Indian Citizenship Act extending citizenship to all U.S.-born American Indians not already covered by treaty or other federal agreements that granted such status. The act was later amended to include Alaska Natives, and as such, the month is also recognized as Native American/Alaskan Native Heritage Month.*
#### People v Borgella

2d Dept: 144 AD3d 1048 (Kings)

denied 3/23/17 (DiFiore, Ch. J.)
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SAMSON WOUBETU, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 23-0949 (UNA)

)

DSK MARIAM ETHIOPIAN )

ORTHODOX TEWAHIDO )

CHURCH PEOPLE, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on consideration of plaintiff’s application to proceed in 

forma pauperis and pro se complaint. The Court grants the application and, for the reasons 

discussed below, the dismisses the complaint.

A pro se litigant’s pleading is held to less stringent standards than would be applied to a 

formal pleading drafted by lawyer. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro 

se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 

656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires 

that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court’s 

jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled 

to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The 

purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim 

being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense, and to 

determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 

(D.D.C. 1977). 
2

Generally, plaintiff alleges that the priest and members of his church refuse to give him 

money, talk to him, or allow him to eat in the dining room; they also beat him, insult him, and 

watch him on camera. Missing from the complaint, however, is a statement establishing a basis 

for this Court’s jurisdiction, a statement of claim or a demand for relief. As drafted, the 

complaint fails to comply with the minimum pleading standard set forth in Rule 8(a) and, 

therefore, must be dismissed. A separate order will issue. 

DATE: April 19, 2023 /s/

TANYA S. CHUTKAN

United States District Judge
1

SUMMARY 

INFORMATION

A. Applicant Information: 

(Check all that apply)

X Not a 

Consortium

Interstate 

Consortium

Intrastate 

Consortium

Community now receives EAS subsidy

X

Community (or Consortium member) previously 

received a Small Community Grant

If previous recipient, date of grant: June 26, 2002

Expiration date of grant: March 12, 2005

B. Public/Private Partnerships: 

(List organization names)

Public Private

1. Santa Maria Public 

Airport District

1. Santa Maria Valley Chamber 

of Commerce & Visitor & 

Convention Bureau

2. Santa Maria Economic 

Development Commission

C. Project Proposal: 

(Check all that apply)

X Marketing X Start-up Cost Offset

Travel Bank X Secure Additional 

Service

Surface Transportation X New Route

Launch New Carrier Subsidy

Study X Revenue Guarantee

Upgrade Aircraft First Service

Service Restoration Other (specify): Regional Service

D. Existing Landing Aids at Local Airport:

X Full ILS X Published Instrument Approach

X Localizer X Outer/Middle Marker

X Other (specify): VOR and GPS Approaches

E. Project Cost:

Line Description

Sub

Total

Total

Amount

1 Federal amount requested $490,000

2 State cash financial 

contribution $0

Local cash financial 

contribution

3a Airport cash funds $45,000

3b Non-airport cash funds $130,000

3 Total local cash funds 

(3a+3b) $175,000

4 TOTAL CASH FUNDING 

(1+2+3) $665,000

In-Kind contribution

5a Airport In-Kind

contribution** $55,000

5b Other In-Kind

contribution** $10,000

5 TOTAL IN-KIND 

CONTRIBUTION (5a+5b) $65,000

6 TOTAL PROJECT COST (4+5) $730,000

F. In-Kind Contributions:

For funds in lines 5a (Airport In-Kind contribution) and 5b (Other In-Kind 

contribution), please describe the source(s) of fund(s) for each.

5a Airport In-Kind contribution: Fee waivers

5b Other In-Kind contribution: Marketing

G. Is this application subject to review by State 

under Executive Order 12372 process?

a. This application was made available to the State 

under the Executive Order 12372. Process for 

review on (date) _____________.

b. Program is subject to E.O. 12372, but has not 

been selected by the State for review.

c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.

H. Is the Applicant delinquent on any Federal 

debt? (if “yes”, provide explanation)

No

Yes (explain)

X

X
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 114 (Monday, June 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 32651]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15788]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. GT98-47-000]


Canyon Creek Compression Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

June 8, 1988.
    Take notice that on June 3, 1998, Canyon Creek Compression Company 
(Canyon) tendered for filing Title Page as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Third Revised Volume No. 1, to be effective July 3, 1998.
    Canyon states that the purpose of the filing is to reflect an 
address change and a name change regarding the contact person and the 
contact person's telephone and facsimile numbers.
    Canyon requested waiver of the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission's (Commission) Regulations to the extent necessary to permit 
the tendered Title Page to become effective July 3, 1998, thirty (30) 
days from the date of the filing.
    Canyon states that copies of the filing are being mailed to 
Canyon's customers and interested state regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in 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.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-15788 Filed 6-12-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Section 114 Request

Start-up/Shutdowns/Malfunctions


### 2009 I. HOURS DOWNTIME Nitric Acid Plant Tail Gas Stack HRS

DATE CAUSE DOWN 1/8/2009Steam Leak Forces an Emergency Shutdown in 8

the Nitric Acid Plant 3/10/2009 Routine Gauze Change 8.25 5/18/2009 Nitric Acid Plant Outage Due to Power Dip 7.5 6/11/2009 Routine Gauze Change 14 9/14/2009 Bi-Annual Maintenance Turnaround 482 -10/2/2010

**TOTAL** 519.75 Hours of Operation = 8760 hr/yr - 519.75 hrs down = **8240**


### 2008 I. HOURS DOWNTIME

Nitric Acid Plant Tail Gas Stack HRS DATE CAUSE DOWN 1/3-5/2008Leak in the Nitric Acid Converter Basket Forces an 55.83

Emergency Shutdown in the Nitric Acid Plant 3/3/2008 Routine Gauze Change 12 6/3/2008 Routine Gauze Change 12 9/9-10/2008Routine Gauze Change 23 9/29-30/2008 Leak from RV-700 Forces an Emergency Shutdown 9

in the Nitric Acid Plant 12/9/2008Routine Gauze Change 18

**TOTAL** 129.83 Hours of Operation = 8784 hr/yr - 129.83 hrs down = **8654**

### 2007

I. HOURS DOWNTIME Nitric Acid Plant Tail Gas Stack HRS

DATE CAUSE DOWN 3/8/2007 Routine Gauze Change 11.6 6/2/2007 Bi-Annual Maintenance Turnaround 431.5 9/20/2007 Routine Gauze Change 15.5 10/10/2007Coked Reformer Catalyst Forces a Plant Wide 251

Emergency Shutdown

**TOTAL** 709.6 Hours of Operation = 8760 hr/yr - 709.6 hrs down = **8050**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MONARCH
CEMENT COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE
QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       2,242,727
<SECURITIES>                                12,479,057
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,753,015
<ALLOWANCES>                                   584,000
<INVENTORY>                                 10,808,878
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,337,876
<PP&E>                                      94,632,802
<DEPRECIATION>                              70,645,011
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              67,000,968
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,637,085
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    10,565,725
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,548,873
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                67,000,968
<SALES>                                     65,527,686
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            65,527,686
<CGS>                                       47,790,374
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               47,790,374
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             12,832,637
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,750,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          8,082,637
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,082,637
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.91
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.91
        

</TABLE>
#### Zarnoch v Luckina

4th Dept: 148 AD3d 1615 (Appeal Nos. 1 and 2)

denied
Silo | FACILITY SHEET

1

FACILITY PROFILE

1940 Road 136

Cheyenne, WY 82009

41.247580 ̊ Lat. -104.597064 ̊ Long.

307.421.3711 O

Directions to Facility Drive north on I-25 from Cheyenne, WY. Exit 17 (right turn) 

east on State Highway 85 (Torrington Highway) for 7 miles to 

County Road 222 (right turn) head east for 5 miles to County 

Road 136 (right turn) for 2 miles. Facility is on West (right) side 

of County Road 136.

Hours of Operation 7 Days a week, 24 Hours a day

Area Sales & Marketing Darrell Saucier – Regional Sales Manager – 713.703.2219

Permit Number BP-11-00656

Waste Accepted Flow back and production water

LF Design Multi-layered engineered liner system included 3’ of compacted 

clay, leak detection, 40 and 60 mil HDPE with geonet.

Groundwater Monitoring Accomplished by 5 dedicated monitoring wells.

Waste Acceptance Protocol All accepted waste must be fewer than two percent solids. 

Onsite testing by spinouts can occur if paperwork was not 

transmitted beforehand.

Facility History Built in 1995, has passed through several owners and 

processes onsite including reverse osmosis and oil and water 

separation. 
 Silo | FACILITY SHEET

2

ABOUT R360 ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS 

Based in Houston, R360 Environmental Solutions is the nation’s leading oilfield environmental solutions 

company. It provides disposal of both solid and liquid E&P waste. R360 helps the nation’s operators 

ensure environmental performance and compliance in major oil and gas plays. Learn more about R360 

Environmental Solutions by visiting us online at r360environmentalsolutions.com.
##### 



Covansys (Mauritius) Limited
    
    MauritiusCBSI Financial Services Corporation
    
    MichiganCovansys Luxembourg
    
    LuxembourgCovansys (India) Private Limited
    
    IndiaBPR Management S.A.
    
    BelgiumCBSI Belgium N.V.
    
    BelgiumBPR Belgium
    
    BelgiumCovansys Canada, Inc.
    
    CanadaE-Business Solutions.com, Inc.
    
    DelawareCovansys (Singapore) Pte Ltd
    
    SingaporeCovansys S.A.
    
    SwitzerlandCovansys Deutschland GmbH
    
    GermanyCovansys Netherlands B.V.
    
    NetherlandsCovansys UK Limited
    
    UKCovansys S.r.l.
    
    ItalyCovansys S.L.
    
    SpainPDA Software
Services, Inc.
    
    DelawareOZ Acquisition Corporation
    
    MichiganClaremont Retirement Technologies, Inc.
    
    OhioConvansys Consulting Services Corporation
    
    MichiganSCS Acquisition Corporation
    
    MichiganFortune Infotech Limited
    
    IndiaTechnology Service Partners, Inc.
    
    Florida
- -- ·-·--···--- ---·. ·--··- ···- ------ ·-----~---: __ ·--·-· .... ----·- --·-·-· ·-------~~---- -··-------- ·------···-·-----·-----

_____ 7 ~ w <'~+-/n j _j ~ r-e,s C?.-f"d s on 

h o_l(.J_±Q 5o c~Joo~ -8~~~5 q <-opy c-f 

-t:~~ St,..p~\v-~n.~..vrf-q_( (___i~k5 ('-ecof'd ~1\ 

t:~--£~Jl.o ~.v: >'~j : ·r r_._ ?._.+-.No c.{)... d-3, Jet 7- B> 

-;-r-. __ ~+. No c~ ;)_1,:J~<D-B 

T r ~--~ + . "! o c../J-. ~ :s ( J ~ r - f2, 

T r-. c..+- , tV o c_f<. J. -, ~ ?o -8 - ---- -- - ·I -

H .:u;~.Q_ Q('~ ·-\ ~c w. r~+- N.~ h~- s ... w ~ -? 9, :t., -~ l - o g 

LU~ .. _'fC?, '7:-3/-67 

.wR- ?<g :Z:5l-65 - -------·- - ----- -·- ------------ ---- --- -- -I -

WR- 7'6'13/-ob - --- . t 

'fY\V-...c_~ _; _+ Wo <,<._-/ d k,, {-o pl-Lf'c~qs..R.,-. cop1'« s f:rC)., 

-T!-u__ Lo~+.- lhCvh k._s +or- yowl 'f-,·,~..Q_' ~/e.:;•>-Q__ 

~ eb po o') cl a:::t- y 0 c:.z.r e q_ (' ( I• a:? 7-- c Cl T1 v lfkn (_ .Q_ ~ 

- RECEIVED IN - - - cf\ e.spe ~ r-PJ! 'f 

COURTOFCRI~INA~~~P;Ah§_ _ K~r\IL:+h 'Soh>tScF( 

_ MAR 18 2qJS _ ~obe.rfscVl ~; +- ·r~c i fJ ?9>~ 

Abel Acosta, Clerk - 1d-C)-'7f FfVI. ~£2'd.-
No. 09-10791.

#### Michael Thomas, Petitioner v. James Yates, Warden, et al.

562 U.S. 852, 131 S. Ct. 110,

178 L. Ed. 2d 67,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6035.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 368 Fed. Appx. 797.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Gregory A. Serrao, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, of
     American Dental Partners, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to
     Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended
     December 31, 2002 which this certification accompanies fully complies with
     the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
     of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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



/s/ GREGORY A. SERRAO
-----------------------------------------------------
Gregory A. Serrao, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
March 17, 2003
No. 09-1438.

#### Esther Chow, Petitioner v. Appellate Division, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, et al.

562 U.S. 834, 131 S. Ct. 131,

178 L. Ed. 2d 34,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6327.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, denied.
2013 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

4-2-2013 

# H a ddr ick B y r d v

. R ob e r t S h a nnon

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : P r e c e de n t i al

D ock e t N o . 11-1744

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2013

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2013 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du

. R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" H a ddr ick B y r d v

. R o be r t S h a nnon " (2013). 2013 D e cisio n s

. P a pe r 905. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2013/905

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

______ No. 11

- 1744

______ HADDRICK BYRD,

Appellant

v. ROBERT SHANNON, Superintendent SCI

- Frackville; V. STANISHEFSKI, Corrections Health Care Administrator SCI

- Frackville; JACK ROBINSON, Supervising Nurse SCI

- Frackville; H. SPENCER, Nurse SCI

- Frackville; DORINA VARNER, Chief Grievance Officer, Camp Hill, PA

______ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Penns ylvania (D.C. No. 1

- 09

- cv

- 01551) District Judge: Honorable Sylvia H. Rambo

______ Present: FUENTES, FISHER and COWEN
, Circuit Judges

.

______ SUR PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING

______

The petition for panel rehearing filed by Appellant having been submi tted to the judges who participated in the decision of this court, it is hereby ORDERED that the petition for panel rehearing is GRANTED. The opinion filed March 11, 2013 , is hereby VACATED, and a subsequent opinion will be issued.

The court’s order ent ered March 27, 2013, denying the motion for stay of the payment of the filing fee is VACATED . Payment of the filing fee shall be stayed pending further order of the court.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ D. Michael Fisher Circuit Judge Dated: April 2, 2013

### CJG/cc: Haddrick Byrd Raymond W. Dorian, Esq. Richard H. Frankel, Esq. Alexandra Scanlon Rebecca Trela
# How to find out about changes in DSCR operating status during inclement weather, other emergencies

/ Published Jan. 3, 2022
Richmond, Va., 
Richmond Metro area temperatures have varied in recent days by 20 degrees or more, but much of the area saw it first winter weather Jan. 3 with rain changing to sleet and snow.

When winter-like weather or hazardous driving conditions do arrive, how will you be notified of changes in Defense Supply Center Richmond’s operating status?

There are several ways center employees can find out about changes in the installation’s operating status during inclement weather and other emergencies. If there are any changes in operating status (i.e. delayed openings, closures), the home page of DLA Aviation’s public website will display a change in status. Employees can also call the DSCR Information/Hazardous Weather Hotline at (804) 279-3599.

Richmond area television stations (WTVR 6, WRIC 8 and WWBT 12) also run installation delays or closure announcements both on-air and on their webpages.

Employees can be notified of operating status changes on their mobile or home numbers, text or personal email by signing up for the AtHoc computer-based emergency notification system (available for common-access card holders who are current DLA employees). To make sure personal information is up-to-date, log into AtHoc, which can be found in each employees’ desktop applications or by clicking on the “show hidden icons” bar on the bottom of your computer screen. Once AtHoc opens, click on “Access Self Service” to review and/or update email addresses and contact numbers.

An Emergency Notification Guide outlines all the methods listed above to remain aware of changes to the installation’s operational status.
No. 09-9986.

#### Ganiyu Jaiyeola, Petitioner v. Carrier Corporation.

562 U.S. 843, 131 S. Ct. 78,

178 L. Ed. 2d 50,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5785,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Same case below, 350 Fed. Appx. 583.
#### 406 Broome St Rest Inc., Respondent, v Lafayette Center, LLC, Appellant.

[50 NYS3d 289]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered March 1, 2016, after a nonjury trial, awarding plaintiff the principal sum of $900,000, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that defendant violated the terms of the parties’ lease by unreasonably withholding consent to plaintiff’s proposed assignment of the leased space to a third party *(see Garza v 508 W. 112th St., Inc.,*71 AD3d 567 [1st Dept 2010]). The court appropriately determined that the measure of plaintiff’s damages due to defendant’s withholding of consent was the $900,000 that the potential assignee had offered as key money *(see e.g. Giordano v Miller,*288 AD2d 181 [2d Dept 2001]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.R, Manzanet-Daniels, Gische and Kahn, JJ.