alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32491-32492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13740]



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



DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY



Federal Emergency Management Agency



[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1912-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]




Kentucky; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster 

Declaration



AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.



ACTION: Notice.



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



SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 

for the Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-



[[Page 32492]]



1912-DR), dated May 11, 2010, and related determinations.



DATES: Effective Date: May 28, 2010.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate, 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20472, (202) 646-3886.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 

for the Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby amended to include the 

following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely 

affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his 

declaration of May 11, 2010.



    Bourbon, Christian, Clark, and Hardin Counties for Individual 

Assistance.

    Bracken, Carroll, Gallatin, Harrison, Lyon, Marshall, McLean, 

Morgan, Robertson, Trigg, and Union Counties for Public Assistance.

    Crittenden, Lee, Livingston, and Wolfe Counties for Individual 

Assistance and Public Assistance.

    Butler, Clinton, Cumberland, Edmonson, Estill, Hopkins, Larue, 

Ohio, Russell, Taylor, and Wayne Counties for Individual Assistance 

(already designated for Public Assistance).

    Franklin and Montgomery Counties for Public Assistance (already 

designated for Individual Assistance).



The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 

are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 

Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 

97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 

Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 

Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in 

Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 

Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 

Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 

Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 

Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 

Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.



W. Craig Fugate,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2010-13740 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of New England Realty Associates Limited Partnership (the “Partnership”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, HaroldBrown, the Treasurer and a Director of the Partnership’s General Partner,NewReal, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18.U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.

 

 
|   | /s/  HAROLD BROWN                       |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   |                                    |
|   | Harold Brown                            |   |
|   | Principal Financial Officer             |   |
|   | (Treasurer and Director of              |   |
|   | the Partnership’s General Partner, |   |
|   | NewReal, Inc.)                     |   |
|        |                                         |  |  |

 

 

May 16, 2005

 

----
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10153-0119

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

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

Stephen Karotkin (pro hac vice) 

(stephen.karotkin@weil.com) 

Ray C. Schrock, P.C. (pro hac vice) 

(ray.schrock@weil.com) 

Jessica Liou (pro hac vice) 

(jessica.liou@weil.com) 

Matthew Goren (pro hac vice) 

(matthew.goren@weil.com) 

767 Fifth Avenue 

New York, NY 10153-0119 

Tel: 212 310 8000 

Fax: 212 310 8007 

KELLER & BENVENUTTI LLP 

Tobias S. Keller (#151445) 

(tkeller@kellerbenvenutti.com) 

Jane Kim (#298192) 

(jkim@kellerbenvenutti.com) 

650 California Street, Suite 1900 

San Francisco, CA 94108 

Tel: 415 496 6723 

Fax: 650 636 9251 

Attorneys for Debtors and Debtors in Possession

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP 

Paul H. Zumbro (pro hac vice) 

(pzumbro@cravath.com) 

Kevin J. Orsini (pro hac vice) 

(korsini@cravath.com) 

Omid H. Nasab (pro hac vice) 

(onasab@cravath.com) 

825 Eighth Avenue 

New York, NY 10019

Tel: 212 474 1000 

Fax: 212 474 3700 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION,

 - and - 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Bankruptcy Case No. 19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11 

(Lead Case) (Jointly Administered) 

ORDER PURSUANT TO L.B.R. 9013-1(c) 

AUTHORIZING OVERSIZE BRIEFING FOR 

DEBTORS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF 

SUBROGATION CLAIMS SETTLEMENT 

AND RSA MOTION

[No Hearing Requested] 

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). 

Signed and Filed: October 22, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

October 23, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4410 Filed: 10/22/19 Entered: 10/23/19 07:23:30 Page 1 of

2
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10153-0119

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

The Court, having reviewed the Ex Parte Application for Order Pursuant to L.B.R. 

9013-1(c) Authorizing Oversize Briefing for Debtors’ Reply in Support of Subrogation Claims 

Settlement and RSA Motion (the “Application”), filed on October 21, 2019; and after due 

deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. The Application is granted, as provided herein. 

2. The Debtors are authorized to file and serve the Reply (as defined in the 

Application), in excess of 15 pages, but not to exceed 25 pages (exclusive of 

any schedules or exhibits thereto and/or any declarations filed in connection 

therewith). 

** END OF ORDER ** 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4410 Filed: 10/22/19 Entered: 10/23/19 07:23:30 Page 2 of

2
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re:

Pacific Gas & Electric Corp., et al.

 Debtors.

Chapter 11

Case No. 19-30088 Chapter 11

(Jointly Administered)

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. § 

1111(a). Transferee hereby gives evidence and notice pursuant to Rule 3001(e)(2) of the Federal

Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure of the transfer, other than for security, of the claim referenced in 

this evidence and notice.

Tetra Tech Inc

Name of Transferor

Phone: (626) 470-2559

Last Four Digits of Acct #: N/A

Name and Address where notices and 

payments to transferee should be sent:

Whitebox Relative Value Partners, LP

c/o Whitebox Advisors

3033 Excelsior Blvd, Suite 300

Minneapolis, MN 55416-4675

Attn: Scott Specken

Whitebox Relative Value Partners, LP

Name of Transferee

Phone: (612) 253-6061

Last Four Digits of Acct #: N/A

Claim No: 19896

Debtor: Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

(19-30089)

Date Filed: October 10, 2019

Total Amount of Claim: $401,362.01

Transferred Amount of Claim: 

$401,362.01

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice is true and correct 

to the best of my knowledge and belief.

By:______________________________ Date:____________

Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, 

or both. 18 U.S.C. 152 & 3571.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 9566B3CA-AF5D-4DF4-8F4F-DD1413A493B4

12/2/2019 | 16:12 PST

Mark Strefling

Partner & CEO

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4960 Filed: 12/03/19 Entered: 12/03/19 15:26:13 Page 1 of

2
WHITEBOX RELATIVE VALUE PARTNERS, LP

c/o Whitebox Advisors3033 Excelsior Blvd., Suite 300Minneapolis, MN 55416-4675Attn: Scott Specken

401,362.01

100

WHITEBOX RELATIVE VALUE PARTNERS, LP

Mark StreflingPartner & CEO

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4960 Filed: 12/03/19 Entered: 12/03/19 15:26:13 Page 2 of

2
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

CHRISTOPHER CORNELIUS SCOTT, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-3258

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed May 8, 2019. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas 

County; Michael F. Andrews, Judge.

James Dickson Crock, Special Assistant 

Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Brian H. Zack, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

MORRIS, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION and PACIFIC GAS 

AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors

Chapter 11 

No. 19-30088 (DM) 

(Jointly Administered)

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. § 1111(a). 

Transferee hereby gives evidence and notice pursuant to Rule 3001(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of 

Bankruptcy Procedure of the transfer, other than for security, of the claim referenced in this 

evidence and notice.

Commercial Power Sweep, Inc. Cherokee Debt Acquisition, LLC

Name of Transferor Name of Transferee

Name and Current Address of

Transferor:

Commercial Power Sweep, Inc.

P.O. Box 2596 

Napa, CA 94558 

Attn: Ken Lindsey

Name and Address where notices and payments 

to transferee should be sent: 

Cherokee Debt Acquisition, LLC

1325 Avenue of the Americas, 28th Floor 

New York, NY 10019 

Attn: Vladimir Jelisavcic

Schedule/Claim No. Creditor Name Amount Debtor Case No.

Claim No. 3395 Commercial Power Sweep, Inc. $42,441.19 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 19-30089

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice is true and correct 

to the best of my knowledge and belief. 

By: _____________________ Date: November 22, 2019 

Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, 

or both. 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 & 3571. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4841 Filed: 11/22/19 Entered: 11/22/19 12:21:38 Page 1 of

2
CHEROKEE DEBT ACQUISITION, LLC

1325 Avenue of the Americas, 28th Floor

New York, NY 10019

Attn: Vladimir Jelisavcic

22

CHEROKEE DEBT ACQUISITION, LLC

Vladimir Jelisavcic

Manager

100

42,441.19

CI

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4841 Filed: 11/22/19 Entered: 11/22/19 12:21:38 Page 2 of

2
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Bray and Overton 

Argued at Norfolk, Virginia 

LEO LAMONT VEREEN 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 2809-96-1 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON 

 OCTOBER 7, 1997 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

 FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS 

Randolph T. West, Judge 

 James S. Ellenson for appellant. 

 Leah A. Darron, Assistant Attorney General 

(James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General; 

H. Elizabeth Shaffer, Assistant Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 Leo Lamont Vereen (defendant) appeals his conviction for 

possession of a handgun while being a felon. He contends that 

the trial court abused its discretion by continuing his trial, 

sua sponte, after the Commonwealth had rested. Because we find 

no merit to this argument, we affirm. 

 The parties are fully conversant with the record in the 

cause, and because this memorandum opinion carries no 

precedential value, no recitation of the facts is necessary. 

 "A motion for a continuance . . . is addressed to the sound 

discretion of the trial court whose decision will not be reversed 

unless the record affirmatively shows an abuse of such 

discretion." Smith v. Commonwealth, 16 Va. App. 630, 634, 432 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
 2 

S.E.2d 2, 5 (1993) (citing Shifflett v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 25, 

30, 235 S.E.2d 316, 319 (1977)). Defendant ascribes error to the 

distinction between the trial court granting a motion of the 

parties to continue the case and the court continuing the case by 

its own motion. This is a distinction without a difference. "A 

trial judge has the right, indeed it is his duty, when necessary 

for the fair and orderly administration of justice to participate 

in the trial and facilitate its progress." Skipper v. 

Commonwealth, 195 Va. 870, 879, 80 S.E.2d 401, 406 (1954). A 

trial court may even reopen the case after closing arguments have 

been made if it deems that justice so requires. See Robinson v. 

Commonwealth, 190 Va. 134, 141, 56 S.E.2d 367, 370-71 (1949). It 

surely has the power to continue a case to allow further evidence 

on a relevant issue even if the Commonwealth has rested. 

 We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by 

continuing the case on its own. Accordingly, we affirm 

defendant's conviction. 

 Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF


CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF


GREENLIGHT CAPITAL RE, LTD.








This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K/A (the ‘‘Form 10-K/A ’’) for the year ended December 31, 2018 of Greenlight Capital Re, Ltd. (the ‘‘Issuer’’).





I, Simon Burton, the Principal Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:





1. The Form 10-K/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)), as amended; and





2. The information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.








Dated:March 15, 2019/s/ SIMON BURTONSimon BurtonChief Executive Officer(principal executive officer)
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

ANTHONY VICTOR LEROSE, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4864 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed April 5, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee County; Deno Economou, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Julius J. Aulisio, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jonathan S. Tannen, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
LaROSE, C.J., and KHOUZAM and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
#### Mary E. Ryan, Respondent, v. The Manhattan Railway Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order denying new trial reversed, and new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by

Pratt, J.;

Dykman, J., not sitting.
#### Zurich Insurance Company, Respondent, v R. Electric, Inc., Appellant, et al., Respondent.

[773 NYS2d 560]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), entered on or about July 3, 2003, which granted petitioner’s *339application to compel respondent to proceed to arbitration in New York, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We reject respondent’s claim that the IAS court was required to conduct a trial on the validity of the second agreement between the parties before it could order arbitration under the first agreement. Since each of these agreements contains an arbitration clause, respondent must arbitrate, regardless of which of the two controls. Nor does it avail respondent to argue that the agreements violate Hawaii law, are the products of disparate bargaining power, and are unenforceable for various other reasons, since respondent raises no arguments specific to the arbitration clause itself. Under both New York and Hawaii law, courts look only to whether the arbitration clause itself was induced by fraud or duress; the question of whether the overall agreement is invalid is for the arbitrators *(see Candid Prods. v SFM Media Serv. Corp.,*51 AD2d 943, 944 [1976], citing *Matter of Weinrott [Carp],*32 NY2d 190, 198-199 [1973]; *Lee v Heftel,*81 Haw 1, 4, 911 P2d 721, 724 [1996]). Because the arbitration clause, which selects New York as the place of arbitration, is valid, New York has personal jurisdiction over respondent, and is a convenient forum as a matter of law *(see National Union Fire Ins. Co. v Williams,*223 AD2d 395, 398 [1996]). No showing is made that enforcement of the parties’ choice of New York would make the arbitration “ ‘so gravely difficult and inconvenient that [respondent] would, for all practical purposes, he deprived of [its] day in court’ ” *(Matter of Fidelity & Deposit Co. v Altman,*209 AD2d 195 [1994]). Respondent’s arguments concerning petitioner’s allegedly defective service of its demand for arbitration should be addressed to the arbitrators *(see Matter of County of Rockland [Primiano Constr. Co.],*51 NY2d 1, 8-9 [1980]; *Hokama v University of Hawaii,*92 Haw 268, 275, 990 P2d 1150, 1157 [1999]). We decline to consider respondent’s argument, raised for the first time in its reply brief, that petitioner’s claim is time-barred. We have considered respondent’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Andrias, Saxe and Marlow, JJ.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No. 10-5319 September Term, 2010

FILED ON: OCTOBER 14, 2011

ADNAN FARHAN ABDUL LATIF, DETAINEE, CAMP DELTA, ET AL.,

APPELLEES

v.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL.,

APPELLANTS

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia

(No. 1:04-cv-01254)

Before: HENDERSON, TATEL and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

Classified Opinion Not Available to Public
Unassociated Document


    EXHIBIT
4.3

     

    
      PROMISSORY
NOTE

      Roger
Ralston


       

      
        	Boca Raton,
      Florida  	
                   $20,000.00

              


      

      March 26,
2009

      


      For value received, the undersigned
DirectView Holdings, Inc.(“Borrower”) with office Located at 7700 W Camino Real,
Suite 403, Boca Raton, FL  33433, promises to pay to in lawful money
of the United States of America or security equivalent to the order
of  Roger Ralston, (“Lender”) located at  19576 Saturnia Lakes Dr.,
Boca Raton, FL 33433 or such other place as the Lender may designate in
writing, the principle sum of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,000.00), together
with interest thereon at the rate of 12.0% per annum.  Principal and
related interest shall be payable on September 25, 2009

      


      This Promissory note may be pre-paid in
whole or in part at any time prior to the maturity without premium or penalty of
any kind.  Borrower may prepay this Note in cash or other equivalent
securities at any time without penalty.  If paid in stock it will be
paid at par value per share.

      


      The
Borrower and any endorsers of this note hereby agree to waive demand, notice of
non-payment and protest, and in case suit shall be brought for the collection
hereof or the note has to be collected upon demand of any attorney, to pay
reasonable attorney’s fees for making such collection, and/or attorney’s fees
and costs incurred by Lender, or holders hereof in prosecuting or defending
litigation to effect collection, including costs and attorney’s fees in
appellate courts.

      


      During
the period of any default under the terms of this Note, and from and after
maturity, the interest rate on the entire indebtedness then outstanding shall be
at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum.  Notwithstanding any
provision of the Note to the contrary, it is expressly agreed that the amounts
payable under this Note in the nature of or which would be considered as
interest or other charge for the use or loan of money shall not exceed the
highest rate allowed by the laws of the State of Florida.

      


      This
Promissory Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Florida.

    

    
      
        


        DirectView Holdings, Inc.

         

        By:

        


        Name: Roger
Ralston

        


        Title:  CEO