alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

CFO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, the undersigned officer of Westway Group, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies that the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                               
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 16, 2010 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Thomas A. Masilla, Jr.                    
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Thomas A. Masilla, Jr. Chief
Financial Officer
EX-35 (e)
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

March 23, 2007

Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.
4 Worid Financial Center
New York, NY 10281

RE: Annual Statement As To Compliance for Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors
Trust, Series 2006-Al

Per Section 3.16 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of 3/1/2006,
the undersigned Officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., (Securities Administrator),
hereby certifies the following for the 2006 calendar year or portion thereof:

(i)     a review of such party's activities during the preceding calendar year
        or portion thereof and of such party's performance under this Agreement
        has been made under such officer's supervision and

(ii)    to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such
        party has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement in all
        material respects throughout such year or portion thereof, or, if there
        has been a failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material
        respect, specifying each such failure known to such officer and the
        nature and status thereof.

Certified By:
/s/ Scott Strack
Scott Strack, Vice President

Certified By:
/s/ Gordon Johnson
Gordon Johnson, Assistant Secretary
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

CHARLES TALBERT,

Petitioner

v.

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CENTURION; GINA HARRISON, CRNP; WELLPATH MEDICAL; SCOTT PRINCE; DEVON WOLFOLK; LORETTA DEBOER,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 237 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 1st day of November, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Reyes, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Maraño, J.), rendered September 17,1985.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed *(see, People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Fiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
#### Dolan BOYD, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 45074.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 14, 1972.

Rehearing Denied July 28, 1972.

*194W. S. Carpenter, Jr., Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., John B. Tolle, Asst. Dist. Atty., Dallas, and Jim D. Voll-ers, State’s Atty., and Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State’s Atty., Ausitn, for the State.

OPINION

DOUGLAS, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for the possession of marihuana. The jury assessed the punishment at two years.

The sufficiency of the evidence is challenged.

An officer saw two men pushing a car at approximately seven o’clock on a Sunday morning. He stopped to see if the car was stolen. Another officer arrived. Upon further investigation, the officers ascertained that the appellant was wanted on a traffic ticket. A search revealed that appellant had a small marihuana cigarette in his overcoat pocket. The appellant testified that the officers found the cigarette in his pocket but he did not know it was there. The jury chose not to believe the appellant’s version.1

The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict.

The contention that the State failed to prove that the substance found was a narcotic drug is overruled. Article 725b, Vernon’s Ann.P.C., classifies marihuana as a narcotic drug. We have previously held in many cases that such a classification is not unreasonable. See, e. g., Willoughby v. State, 481 S.W.2d 893 (1972); Reyna v. State, 434 S.W.2d 362.

We perceive no error in the contention that the marihuana cigarette was not shown to be of such a quantity and quality to be susceptible to use as a narcotic. It could have been smoked in the cigarette or in a pipe. See Alaniz v. State, 458 S.W.2d 813. No proof of the purity of marihuana is required.

No error has been shown. The judgment is affirmed.

1

. At the penalty stage of the trial it was shown that the appellant had received probation for felony theft.
#### BLACKWELL v. GUIFFRIA.

No. 17114.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

March 27, 1939.

Sidney G. Roos, of New Orleans, for appellant.

Taylor Caffery, of New Orleans, for appellee.

WESTERFIELD, Judge.

Plaintiff, Edna Blackwell, was injured by the collapse of defective steps attached to the premises occupied by her under lease and belonging to the defendant, Eugene Guiffria. There is no doubt in our minds of the liability of a landlord for injuries sustained by a tenant under the circumstances prevailing in this case. Revised Civil Code, Article 2695; Thomson v. Cooke, 147 La. 922, 86 So. 332; Shelton v. Masur, 157 La. 621, 102 So. 813; Divas v. Noto, 17 La.App. 177, 134 So. 275. Defendant, however, contends that the plaintiff, at the time of the accident, was not a tenant but a trespasser, because notice had been given to her to vacate the premises. No ejectment proceedings had been instituted and only a verbal notice is claimed to have been given plaintiff. The point raised by defendant is inconsistent with his answer in which he admits that plaintiff was a tenant at the time of the accident. Moreover, the evidence with respect to notice falls short of proof since it consists of an affirmation by defendant and a denial by plaintiff, the burden of proof being on defendant.

Plaintiff’s injuries were not serious. In her petition she claims $268 including $32.50, for medical expenses. She suffered contusions in the region of the “sterno-clavicular junction of the chest”, from which she recovered very rapidly. The amount awarded by the judgment, $100, will not be disturbed.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 12-2


<TABLE>
                  PECO ENERGY COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
           COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES
                    AND PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDEND REQUIREMENTS
                                   SEC METHOD
                                     ($000)

<CAPTION>
                                                     3 MONTHS
                                                      ENDED
                                                     03/31/98
                                                                                                  --------

<S>                                                  <C>     
NET INCOME                                           $113,554

ADD BACK:
- INCOME TAXES:
     OPERATING INCOME                                  73,838
     NON-OPERATING INCOME                              (5,105)
                                                      -------
     NET TAXES                                         68,733

- FIXED CHARGES:
     INTEREST APPLICABLE TO DEBT                       83,691
     ANNUAL RENTALS                                     2,101
                                                      -------
     TOTAL FIXED CHARGES                               85,792

EARNINGS REQUIRED FOR PREFERRED DIVIDENDS:
     DIVIDENDS ON PREFERRED STOCK                       3,277
     ADJUSTMENT TO PREFERRED DIVIDENDS*                 1,984
                                                      -------
                                                        5,261

FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED DIVIDENDS                 $91,053
                                                      =======

EARNINGS BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND
    FIXED CHARGES                                    $268,079
                                                     ========
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES
     AND PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDEND REQUIREMENTS           2.94
                                                         ====




<FN>

 * ADDITIONAL CHARGE EQUIVALENT TO EARNINGS REQUIRED
   TO ADJUST DIVIDENDS ON PREFERRED STOCK TO A PRE-TAX BASIS
</FN>



</TABLE>
#### James Young WILSON and Hugh A. Wilson, Jr., Co-partners, Doing Business as Wilson Funeral Home, Appellants, v. Esther GREENBAUM, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B.

Nov. 5, 1954.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 16, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic 

and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of 

any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go 

to press. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 23-BG-0481

IN RE PETER G. ANGELOS,

DDN:047-23

A Member of the Bar of the

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Bar Registration No. 417859

BEFORE: McLeese and Deahl, Associate Judges, and Washington, Senior Judge.

O R D E R

(FILED—August 10, 2023)

On consideration of the certified order from the state of Maryland transferring 

respondent to disability inactive status by consent; this court’s June 16, 2023, order 

suspending respondent pending final disposition of this proceeding and directing 

him to show cause why he should not be suspended based upon a disability pursuant 

to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13; and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel, in which he 

requests that respondent’s reinstatement be conditioned upon his reinstatement in 

Maryland; and it appearing that respondent has not filed a response or his D.C. Bar 

R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit; and it further appearing that respondent has not opposed the 

proposed reinstatement condition, it is

ORDERED that Peter G. Angelos is hereby indefinitely suspended from the 

practice of law in the District of Columbia pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13(e) with 

reinstatement conditioned upon his reinstatement in the state of Maryland. See In re 

Sibley, 990 A.2d 483, 487-88 (D.C. 2010) (explaining that there is a rebuttable 

presumption in favor of imposition of identical discipline and exceptions to this 

presumption should be rare); In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable 

presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the 

respondent does not participate); In re Stanley, 769 A.2d 141 (D.C. 2001) (disability 

suspension is the functional equivalent of inactive status based on disability). It is
No. 23-BG-0481

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement, respondent’s 

suspension will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully 

complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).

PER CURIAM
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7070 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7070

To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act with respect 
 to the types of milk offered under the school lunch program, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 11, 2022

 Ms. Stefanik (for herself, Mrs. Miller-Meeks, Mr. Jacobs of New York, 
and Mr. Garbarino) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                  the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act with respect 
 to the types of milk offered under the school lunch program, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting School Milk Choices Act 
of 2022''.

SEC. 2. TYPES OF MILK OFFERED UNDER THE SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM.

    Section 9(a)(2)(A) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
            (1) by striking clause (ii);
            (2) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); and
            (3) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
                            ``(ii) shall offer students flavored and 
                        unflavored fluid milk;
                            ``(iii) may offer students lactose-free 
                        fluid milk; and''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

                     PEC ISRAEL ECONOMIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                     ------------------------------------------------
                                FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
                                -----------------------

This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the 
consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 1995 and the consolidated 
statement of income for the nine months ended September 30, 1995 and is 
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                  $   31,217,138
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             407,844,937
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                    31,952,180
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 331,942,098
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               407,844,937
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            29,835,228
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,058,837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             22,776,391
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,925,019
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         17,851,372
<DISCONTINUED>                                (564,942)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                17,286,430
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.92
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, DC 20549








FORM 8-K








CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934








Date of Report (date of earliest event reported):  November 9, 2011





Frontier Communications Corporation


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware


(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)





001-11001
06-0619596(Commission File Number)
(IRS Employer Identification No.)3 High Ridge Park, Stamford, Connecticut
06905(Address of principal executive offices)
(Zip Code)





(203) 614-5600


(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)





_________________


(Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)





Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (seeGeneral Instruction A.2. below):





o    Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





o    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





o
Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





o
Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR240.13e-4(c))





Item 8.01
Other Events




The information set forth in the press release issued by Frontier Communications Corporation on November 9, 2011, attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1, is incorporated herein by reference.




Item 9.01
Financial Statements and Exhibits




(d)           Exhibits




99.1
Press Release of Frontier Communications Corporation released on November 9, 2011.












SIGNATURES







Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.










FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATIONDate:  November 9, 2011
By:/s/ Susana D’EmicSusana D’EmicSenior Vice President andController
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549


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


                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT


                     Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
                         Securities Exchange Act of 1934


                         Date of Report: April 23, 2001
                        (Date of earliest event reported)


                       CITICORP MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC.
                             (Packager and Servicer)
    (Issuer in Respect of the REMIC Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2001-5)
               (Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

 Delaware                     333-72459                     13-3408713
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(State or other juris-       (Commission                 (I.R.S. Employer
diction of organization)      File Nos.)                 Identification No.)


12855 North Outer Forty Drive, St. Louis, Missouri            63141
--------------------------------------------------            -----
   (Address of principal executive offices)                 (Zip Code)


Registrant's Telephone Number, including area code (314) 851-6305
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last
report.)


<PAGE>

Item 5.        Other Events.

      Attached as Exhibit 8.5 is the opinion of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft
with respect to certain tax matters relating to the Issuer's REMIC Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2001-5, including their consent.


<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES

      Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.


                                            CITICORP MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC.
                                            (Registrant)

                                           By: /s/ Howard Darmstadter
                                               -------------------------
                                                   Howard Darmstadter
                                                   Assistant Secretary


Dated: April 23, 2001
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Roberta W. Seaman, Deceased. Charlotte L. Gaynor, Appellant; William H. Baxter et al., Respondents.

Appeal unanimously dismissed without costs *(see, Agee v Ajar,*154 AD2d 569). (Appeal from decree of Onondaga County Surrogate’s Court, Wells, S.—testamentary letters.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**THE PENN TRAFFIC COMPANY**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of The Penn Traffic Company (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the fiscal period ending August 4, 2007, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Gregory J. Young, President & Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

# (1)              The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

#  

# (2)              The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/  Gregory J. Young                  |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Gregory  J. Young                      |   |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                                   |   |
| May 22, 2008                      |   |

 

----