alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Emil Horwitz, Plaintiff, v. Aaron Diamond and Others, Impleaded with Bernard Diamond, Defendants.

City Court of New York, Trial Term, New York County,

January 6, 1937.

*Rabenold & Scribner [Edward J. Malament*of counsel; *Freeland F. Penney*with him on the brief], for the plaintiff.

*Charles Eno,*for the defendants.

Keller, J.

The reasonable expense incurred by the accommodation indorser in consequence of the maker’s default, including counsel fees and disbursements, may be recovered from the maker. *(Thompson*v. *Taylor,*72 N. Y. 32.) The counsel fee of $250 was admitted by defendant’s attorney to be reasonable if the maker was liable in the circumstance. The additional items consisting of cablegrams, telephones, typewriting, photostats, process servers’ fees, postage and miscellaneous were not proven in the amounts claimed. I think $100 would reasonably cover these items. Judgment for plaintiff for $350, with appropriate interest. Defendant is allowed a stay of ten days and thirty days to make a case.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)

I, Barry E.
Pakenham, Treasurer of The Potomac Edison Company Company, as servicer (the Servicer), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this
report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of PE Environmental Funding LLC (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this
report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the Servicer, and
based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has
fulfilled its obligations under the Transferred Environmental Control Property Servicing Agreement, dated as of April 11, 2007, between PE Environmental Funding LLC (PE Environmental) and the Servicer and under the Environmental
Control Property Servicing Agreement, dated as of December 23, 2010 between PE Environmental and the Servicer in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and the related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be
included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rule 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

Date: March 30, 2010



|                      |  |                  
|--------------------- |  | -----------------
|/s/ Barry E. Pakenham
|Name:                 |  | Barry E. Pakenham
|Title:                |  | Treasurer
#### Thankful Tanner, Appellant, v. John Rummel, Respondent.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, costs to abide event.

Opinion by

Bradley, J.;

Haight, J., not sitting.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62807-62808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29866]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of the Census
[Docket No. 951127279-5279-01]


Annual Retail Trade Survey

AGENCY: Bureau of the Census, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of determination.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Title 13, United States Code, Sections 182, 
224, and 225, I have determined that the Census Bureau needs to collect 
data covering annual sales, year-end inventories, purchases, and 
accounts receivables to provide a sound statistical basis for the 
formation of policy by various government agencies. These data also 
apply to a variety of public and business needs. This annual survey is 
a continuation of similar retail trade surveys conducted each year 
since 1951 (except 1954). It provides, on a comparable classification 
basis, annual sales, purchases, and accounts receivable balances for 
1995, and year-end inventories for 1994 and 1995. These data are not 
available publicly on a timely basis from nongovernmental or other 
governmental sources.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronald Piencykoski or Dorothy 
Engleking on (301) 457-2713.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Census Bureau is authorized to take 
surveys necessary to furnish current data on the subjects covered by 
the major censuses authorized by Title 13, United States Code. This 
survey will provide continuing and timely national statistical data on 
retail trade for the period between economic censuses. The data 
collected in this survey will be within the general scope and nature of 
those inquiries covered in the economic census.
    The Census Bureau will require a selected sample of firms operating 
retail establishments in the United States (with sales size determining 
the probability of selection) to report in the 1995 Annual Retail Trade 
Survey. We will furnish report forms to the firms covered by this 
survey and will require their submissions within thirty days after 
receipt. The sample will provide, 

[[Page 62808]]
with measurable reliability, statistics on the subjects specified 
above.
    This survey was cleared by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, Public Law 96-
511, as amended, and was cleared under OMB Control No. 0607-0013. We 
will provide copies of the form upon written request to the Director, 
Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC 20233.
    Based upon the foregoing, I have directed that an annual survey be 
conducted for the purpose of collecting these data.

    Dated: November 21, 1995.
Bryant Benton,
Acting Deputy Director, Bureau of the Census.
[FR Doc. 95-29866 Filed 12-06-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5450 Filed: 01/22/20 Entered: 01/22/20 15:30:24 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5450 Filed: 01/22/20 Entered: 01/22/20 15:30:24 Page 2 of

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

EXHIBIT C

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4890-3 Filed: 11/27/19 Entered: 11/27/19 13:24:36 Page 1

of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

EXHIBIT C

EXPENSE SUMMARY

FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 18, 2019 THROUGH NOVEMBER 17, 2019

EXPENSES AMOUNTS

Digital Advertisements re Claims Filing Deadline $4,634.53

TOTAL EXPENSES REQUESTED: $4,634.53

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4890-3 Filed: 11/27/19 Entered: 11/27/19 13:24:36 Page 2

of 2
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #12188 and #12189]

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 2.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-1916-DR), dated 05/14/2010.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         05/01/2010 through 05/02/2010.                    

*Effective Date:*                         05/28/2010.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         07/13/2010.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         02/14/2011.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Mississippi, dated 05/14/2010, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*                     Panola.                 

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2010-13750 Filed 6-8-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Exhibit
10.3


 


[SYNTA LOGO]


 


Personal & Confidential


 


April 14,
2009


 


Keith
Ehrlich


[ADDRESS]


 


Dear
Keith:


 


I
am pleased to inform you that you have been awarded a retention bonus in the
amount of $49,000 (the “Retention Bonus”). 
This Retention Bonus will be paid to you in two installments as
follows:  50% on October 13, 2009
and 50% on April 13, 2010, provided you are an employee of Synta on these
dates.  If you are terminated without “cause”
(as such term is defined in Synta’s Amended and Restated 2006 Stock Plan (the “2006
Stock Plan”)) prior to April 13, 2010, you will be entitled to receive any
portion of the Retention Bonus that you have not yet received.  Should Synta be acquired through merger or
sale of all or substantially all of Synta’s assets, these commitments apply to
any successor company.


 


You
have also been awarded a retention option under the 2006 Stock Plan to purchase
30,870 shares of Synta’s common stock at an exercise price of $2.49 per share
(the “Retention Option”).  The Retention
Option will vest as to 50% of the shares issuable thereunder on January 13,
2010 and as to the remaining 50% of the shares issuable thereunder on October 13,
2010.


 


While
the results of our Phase 3 SYMMETRY trial were obviously very disappointing,
the Board and management of Synta are fully committed to our mission to extend
and enhance the lives of patients.  We
have a valuable collection of drug candidates, impressive research
capabilities, an experienced team, and an exciting plan over the next 12 months
to advance these drug candidates into multiple clinical trials and continue to
generate new candidates to expand our pipeline.


 


We
truly appreciate your hard work, dedication and loyalty to Synta.


 


If
you have any questions concerning the Retention Bonus or the Retention Option,
please do not hesitate to contact Art McMahon or Deb Southmayd.


 


	
  Sincerely,

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/
  Safi Bahcall

  	
   

  
	
  Safi
  Bahcall
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed September 15, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D17-1211 Lower Tribunal No. F11-22273

________________ 

### Sydney Smith , Appellant,
vs. 

### The State of Florida , Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Richard Hersch, Judge. Sydney Smith, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LOBREE, and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.2

Affirmed. See § 705.105, Fla. Stat. (2017); Davis v. State, 198 So. 3d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) ("Section 705.105(1) provides that the title to property seized in connection with a criminal proceeding shall vest permanently in the law enforcement agency sixty days after the conclusion of the criminal proceeding. Thus, in order to seek the return of seized property, a defendant must file a motion within that sixty-day period."); Shirah v. State, 312 So. 3d 1054, 1055-56 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) ("The 60-day vesting does not apply, however, if the property was seized for non-investigative or non-evidentiary purposes. Rather, in such cases, a 4-year statute of limitations applies. § 95.11(3)(i), Fla. Stat. (establishing 4-year statute of limitations to actions for return of property held by the State) . . . .")
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18. U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of NeurogesX, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of NeurogesX, Inc.

Dated: March 30, 2011



By:

/S/    ANTHONY A.
DITONNOAnthony A. DiTonnoPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)By:

/S/    STEPHEN F.
GHIGLIERIStephen F. GhiglieriExecutive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
PHH Mortgage
               PHH
3000 Leadenhall Road
Mt. Laurell, NJ 08054


            REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION AB
                                 SERVICING CRITERIA

PHH Mortgage Corporation (the "Asserting Party") is responsible for assessing
compliance as of December 31, 2007 and for the period from January 1, 2007
through December 31, 2007 (the "Reporting Period" with the servicing
criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations
(the "CFR"), except for criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d)(3)(i)(c),
(d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(xv) and (d)(1)(iii) of the CFR, which the Asserting Party
has concluded are not applicable to the servicing activities it performs with
respect to the transactions covered by this report (the "Applicable Servicing
Criteria").  The criteria set forth in Section 229.1122 (d)(4)(vii) and
(d)(4)(xi) of the CFR are performed by outsource providers on behalf of the
Asserting Party; however, the Asserting Party has monitored the outsourcing of
these criteria and assumes responsibility for compliance.  The transactions
covered by this report include all non-agency loan sale agreements executed
after January 1, 2006 as well as all re-securitization transactions after
January 1, 2006 for which the Asserting Party served as servicer (the
"Platform").

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Servicing Criteria
as of December 31, 2007 and for the Reporting Period and has concluded that
the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the Servicing
Criteria with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.

Deloitte & Touche, an independent registered public accounting firm, has
issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.

PHH Mortgage Corporation Date

Date: February 28, 2008

/s/ Terence W. Edwards
---------------------------
Terence W. Edwards
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Mark Danahy
---------------------------
Mark Danahy
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

/s/ Martin L. Foster
---------------------------
Martin L. Foster
Senior Vice President - Loan Servicing
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. §1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Energy Fuels Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A (Amendment 1) for the period ended December 31, 2018 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark S. Chalmers, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




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

/s/ Mark S. ChalmersMark S. ChalmersChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)


Date: March 12, 2019


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

ALLISON SHANNON,

Respondent

v.

RUFUS SHANNON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 117 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of April, 2021, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

30

31

Adam C. Harris (pro hac vice pending)

James T. Bentley (pro hac vice pending)

Kelly (Bucky) Knight (pro hac vice pending)

SCHULTE ROTH & ZABEL LLP

919 Third Avenue

New York, New York 10022

Telephone: (212) 756-2000

Facsimile: (212) 593-5955

Email: adam.harris@srz.com

Email: james.bentley@srz.com

Email: kelly.knight@srz.com

David M. Guess (SBN 238241)

BIENERT | KATZMAN PC

903 Calle Amanecer, Suite 350

San Clemente, California 92673

Telephone: (949) 369-3700

Facsimile: (949) 369-3701

Email: dguess@bienertkatzman.com

Counsel to certain Utility Bondholders

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

 Debtors.

□ Affects PG&E Corporation

□ Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

■ Affects both Debtors 

*All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case, 

No. 19-30088 (DM) 

Bankruptcy Case No. 19-30088 (DM) 

Chapter 11

(Lead Case)

(Jointly Administered) 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4407-1 Filed: 10/23/19 Entered: 10/23/19 06:13:24 Page 1

of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

30

31

1

I, David M. Guess, declare as follows:

1. I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and 

not a party to the within action. My business address is 903 Calle Amanecer, Suite 350, San Clemente, 

California 92673. I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction 

service was made.

2. On October 23, 2019, I served the following document described as AMENDED

VERIFIED STATEMENT OF SCHULTE ROTH & ZABEL LLP AND BIENERT KATZMAN PC 

PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 2019 on all interested parties 

in this action as stated on the attached service list.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing 

is true and correct. 

Executed on October 23, 2019, at San Francisco, California. 

By: /s/ David M. Guess 

 David M. Guess (SBN 238241)

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4407-1 Filed: 10/23/19 Entered: 10/23/19 06:13:24 Page 2

of 3
DOC ID - 32883300.10

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4407-1 Filed: 10/23/19 Entered: 10/23/19 06:13:24 Page 3

of 3
#### STATE v. C. H. HARVELL alias CHARLIE HARVELL.

(Filed 22 October, 1930.)

1. Criminal Law J e — Motion to set aside judgment as against the weight of the evidence is addressed to discretion of trial court.

A motion to set aside a verdict in a criminal action on the ground that it is against the weight of the evidence is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and his action is not reviewable on appeal in the absence of abuse.

*600S. Criminal Haw I f — Court lias power to consolidate actions, and upon general verdict of guilty to enter judgment on each offense.

Where the trial of two separate criminal indictments are consolidated by the judge and tried together as authorized by C. S., 4622, and a general verdict of guilty is returned by the jury, the verdict will apply to each indictment, and judgment pronounced on one of them, but execution suspended on terms agreed upon, and judgment and sentence entered as to the other, is not objectionable on the ground that only one judgment should have been entered, and *held*further, the sentences being concurrent, the defendant was not prejudiced.

Appeal by defendant from *Granmer, J.,*at April Term, 1930, of BruNswicic.

No error.

*Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.*

*B. M. Kermon for defendant.*

Adams, J.

Two bills of indictment were returned against tbe defendant charging bim with a violation of the prohibition law on 5 August, 1929, and 30 March, 1930, respectively. -Without objection the indictments were tried together, and on each the defendant was convicted. In the first, judgment was pronounced, but execution was suspended upon terms to which the defendant consented;'in the second, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment and to the roads.

The record contains only two exceptions. The first relates to the refusal of the judge to set aside the verdict on the ground that it was contrary to the weight of» the evidence — a matter within the discretion of the judge and not reviewable on appeal when not abused. *Hoke v. Tilley,*174 N. C., 658; *Bailey v. Mineral Co.,*183 N. C., 525.

The second exception is that as both indictments were tried together only one judgment should' have been pronounced. The defendant was tried upon distinct indictments which the trial court was authorized to consolidate. C. S., 4622.

Where there are several counts and each is for a distinct offense, a general verdict of guilty will apply to each and judgment may be pronounced on each count. *S. v. Mills,*181 N. C., 530. In any event since the sentences are concurrent the defendant was not prejudiced in this respect.

No error.