alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, A.F. Petrocelli, Chief Executive Officer of Prime Hospitality Corp. (the
"registrant"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the registrant;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect
<PAGE>
the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: August 13, 2003

                                    /s/ A.F. Petrocelli
                                    -----------------------
                                    A.F. Petrocelli
                                    Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Charles Racalbuto, Respondent.

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), dated November 23, 1988, which granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to dismiss Kings County indictment No. 1366/88.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to dismiss Kings County indictment No. 1366/88 is denied, the indictment is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings on the indictment.

Because there is no indication that the defendant may have been prejudiced thereby, the bifurcated procedure employed by the prosecutor in presenting the instant case to the Grand Jury was proper *(see,*CPL 210.35 [5]; *People v Cade,*74 NY2d 410, 417; *see also, People v Baez,*118 AD2d 863). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, .Rubin and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________

NO. 09-21-00071-CV 

________________

JACOB SMITH, Appellant

V.

SAREN SMITH, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 128th District Court

Orange County, Texas

Trial Cause No. A200493-D

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On March 31, 2021, we notified the parties that the notice of appeal did not 

appear to have been timely filed. The appellant did not file a response. 

In his notice of appeal, appellant stated that he was appealing the trial court’s 

order denying his motion for new trial, which was signed on February 25, 2021. An 

order denying a motion for new trial is not independently appealable; therefore, it 

does not start a new timetable for perfecting appeal. State Office of Risk Mgmt. v. 

Berdan, 335 S.W.3d 421, 428 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2011, pet. denied). “An 

appeal must be taken from the final judgment, not the refusal to reconsider that 
2

judgment.” Morris v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 01-19-00610-CV, 2019 WL 

4677365, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Sept. 26, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.).

“[T]he time for filing a notice of appeal runs from the signing of the final judgment, 

not the subsequent denial of a motion for new trial.” Id. at *2. 

The trial court signed a final judgment on November 3, 2020, and the appellate 

timetables were extended by the timely filing of a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 26.1(a). Notice of appeal was due to be filed on February 1, 2021. 

Appellant filed a notice of appeal on March 26, 2021, more than ninety days 

from the date of judgment and outside the period for which we may grant an 

extension of time to perfect appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. This Court lacks 

jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on May 12, 2021

Opinion Delivered May 13, 2021

Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: March 19, 2015 519191 

________________________________

In the Matter of JESSIE SMITH,

Petitioner, 

v

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as Acting 

Commissioner of Corrections 

and Community Supervision, 

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: January 20, 2015

Before: Lahtinen, J.P., Rose, Egan Jr. and Lynch, JJ.

__________

Jessie Smith, Sonyea, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H.

Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this

Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to

review a determination of respondent which found petitioner

guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with

committing an unhygienic act and disobeying a direct order. The

misbehavior report relates that, during a strip search,

petitioner notified the correction officer that he needed to use

the restroom. Although the correction officer directed

petitioner to continue with the strip search, petitioner urinated

on himself and the floor. At the ensuing tier III disciplinary

hearing, petitioner initially pleaded not guilty to the charges

but subsequently changed his plea to guilty. Petitioner was

found guilty of the charges and that determination was affirmed
-2- 519191 

upon administrative appeal. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR

article 78 proceeding. 

We confirm. Given petitioner's plea of guilty to the

charges, he is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of the

evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of

Campbell v Bedard, 123 AD3d 1278, 1278 [2014]; Matter of Gonzalez

v Annucci, 122 AD3d 1203, 1204 [2014]). Furthermore, to the

extent that petitioner claims that he did not recant his original

plea of not guilty to the charges, the record clearly belies this

contention. In any event, substantial evidence in the form of

the misbehavior report and hearing testimony supports the

determination of guilt. Although petitioner asserts that he is

incontinent, there is no medical evidence in the record to

support his contention and, under such circumstances,

petitioner's explanation presented a credibility issue for the

Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Redmond v Fischer, 116

AD3d 1304, 1304 [2014]).

Lahtinen, J.P., Rose, Egan Jr. and Lynch, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without

costs, and petition dismissed. 

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
Fourth Department,

July, 1990

(July 13, 1990)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Walter Scott, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Ontario County Court, Henry, Jr., J.—criminal sale of controlled substance, fourth degree.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Green, Lawton, Davis and Lowery, JJ.
The Honorable Daniel M. Friedman, Circuit Judge, United States Court of

1

Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3271

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States District

* Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

v. *

* [Unpublished] 

Ronald J. Pulley, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 20, 1997

Filed: July 29, 1997

___________

Before BEAM, FRIEDMAN, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. 1

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ronald J. Pulley pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine base, in violation of 21

U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C). At sentencing, Pulley and the government

stipulated that the quantity of cocaine base attributable to Pulley was more than five

grams but less than twenty grams, and Pulley withdrew his objections to the

presentence report. After advising Pulley of the effects of his guilty plea, the district
The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern 2

District of Missouri.

-2-

court adopted the presentence report, as modified by the stipulation, as findings of fact. 2

The district court sentenced Pulley to 121 months of imprisonment, the minimum

sentence under the range produced by application of the Sentencing Guidelines. 

Pulley appeals, claiming a variety of errors in the calculation of his base offense

level and in the adjustments made in determining his total offense level. He also claims

that the district court erred by holding in abeyance his counsel's motion to withdraw

from representation, pending the plea discussions. We have examined each of Pulley's

claims and find them to be without merit. Because extended discussion is not

warranted, we affirm Pulley's sentence. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

 ATTEST:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Cook *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio.

(No. 24119

Decided June 7, 1933.)

*Mr. R. N. Larrimer*and *Messrs. Woolley é Rowland,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John W. Bricher,*attorney general, and *Mr. R. R. Zurmehly,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error be, and the same is hereby, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Allen, Stephenson, Jones and Matthias, JJ., concur.
| 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)                        |

|   | 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 5.02 | Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers |
|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

|                                | FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION                 |
|-------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                                |                                                |
| Date:  September 19, 2013 | By:/s/ Andrew D. Crain                              |
|                                | Andrew D. Crain                                     |
|                                | Senior Vice President, General Counseland Secretary |
|                                |                                                |
|                                |                                                |
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of
SRKP 10, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Anthony C. Pintsopoulos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
my knowledge:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/
      Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
      C. Pintsopoulos
                Principal
      Financial Officer
                February
      22, 2011
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7013 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7013

 To amend title 5, United States Code, to establish Harriet Tubman Day 
             as a Federal holiday, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 9, 2022

  Mr. Brendan F. Boyle of Pennsylvania (for himself, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. 
   Carson, Mr. Deutch, Ms. Clarke of New York, and Ms. Jackson Lee) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 5, United States Code, to establish Harriet Tubman Day 
             as a Federal holiday, 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 ``Harriet Tubman Day Act''.

SEC. 2. HARRIET TUBMAN DAY.

    Section 6103(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting after the item relating to Washington's Birthday the 
following:
            ``Harriet Tubman Day.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES OF MONROE CAPITAL INCOME PLUS CORPORATION



|Name                                        |  |  | Jurisdiction | 
|------------------------------------------- |  |  | ------------ | 
|MC Income Plus Financing SPV LLC            |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MC Income Plus Financing SPV II LLC         |  |  | Delaware     | 
|Monroe Capital Income Plus ABS Funding, LLC |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company I, LLC                 |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company II, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company III, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company IV, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company V, LLC                 |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company VI, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company VII, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company VIII, LLC              |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company IX, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company X, LLC                 |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XI, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XII, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XIII, LLC              |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XIV, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XV, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XVI, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XVII, LLC              |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XVIII, LLC             |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XIX, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XX, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XXI, LLC               |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XXII, LLC              |  |  | Delaware     | 
|MCIP Holding Company XXIII, LLC             |  |  | Delaware     | 
|Panther Lender MCIP BDC, LLC                |  |  | Delaware     |
H. J. Res. 123

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

Joint Resolution

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003, and for other

purposes.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That Public Law

107–229 is further amended by striking the date specified in section

107(c) and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘November 22, 2002’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JULY 30, 2007

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 06-16601

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00007-CR-WLS-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

CLIFFORD STEWART, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Georgia

_________________________

(July 30, 2007)

Before ANDERSON, BARKETT and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Gerald B. Williams, appointed counsel for Clifford Stewart, has filed a
2

motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent

review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of

the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals

no arguable issue of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and

Stewart’s conviction and sentence is AFFIRMED.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted via telephone conference call. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, October 15, 2008. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7979. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Wednesday, October 15, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or write Sallie Chavez, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Rd., Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Sallie Chavez. Ms. Chavez can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org*.                 

The agenda will include the following: Various IRS issues. 

Dated: August 29, 2008. 

Roy L. Block, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E8-20950 Filed 9-9-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 31.2

CFO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

I, Thomas A. Masilla, Jr., certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Westway Group, Inc.; and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                           
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------
|Date: April 30, 2012 |  | /s/ Thomas A. Masilla, Jr.
|                     |  | Thomas A. Masilla, Jr.    
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer