alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Howard S. Diamond, an Attorney, Respondent. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner.

[808 NYS2d 477]

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1986. He was also admitted in New Jersey in 1985 and maintained a law office in Randolph, New Jersey.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey suspended respondent for one year by order dated October 5, 2005, which suspension was *1012effective on November 1, 2005, for abandoning his clients by closing his law office without notice, neglecting cases for two clients, failing to communicate with clients, failing to deliver proceeds to his client in a personal injury settlement, failing to withdraw from representation of his clients when his impaired physical and mental condition made him unable to continue as an attorney, failing to act to protect his clients’ interests, and failing to cooperate with attorney discipline authorities. The Supreme Court conditioned respondent’s reinstatement to practice on submission of proof of his fitness to practice law as attested to by a mental health professional and that his practice of law be supervised.

Petitioner moves for an order imposing reciprocal discipline (see 22 NYCRR 806.19). Respondent has not appeared on the motion. We grant the motion and further conclude that respondent should be reciprocally suspended from practice for a period of one year (see *e.g. Matter of Robinson,*262 AD2d 865 [1999]). Any application for reinstatement by respondent shall make the showing required by this Court’s rules (see 22 NYCRR 806.12 [b]) and include proof of respondent’s reinstatement in New Jersey. Furthermore, in order to be reinstated, respondent shall submit a psychological opinion that he is capable of practicing law (see *e.g. Matter of Maffongelli,*4 AD3d 613 [2004]) and shall present evidence of proper disposition of his escrow account funds.

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year, effective immediately, and until further order of this Court; and it is further ordered that respondent, for the period of suspension, is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and respondent is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority; or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice with relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court’s rules regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys (s*ee*22 NYCRR 806.9).
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 1 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 2 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 3 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 4 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 5 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 6 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 7 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 8 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 9 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 10 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 11 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 12 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 13 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 14 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 15 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 16 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 17 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 18 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 19 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 20 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 21 of 22
Case 1:08-cv-00388-JM Document 1 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 22 of 22
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         264,953
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,028,598
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,858,113
<INVENTORY>                                  4,773,130
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,351,967
<PP&E>                                       2,087,230
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,290,880
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,477,970
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,939,262
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        225
<COMMON>                                        24,540
<OTHER-SE>                                   (486,057)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,477,970
<SALES>                                      9,709,999
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,709,999
<CGS>                                        8,174,862
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,240,599
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                75,572
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             495,303
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,276,337)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,276,337)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,276,337)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.97)
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1959 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1959

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction from 
  gross income to individuals for expenses paid in using mass transit 
                              facilities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2001

   Mr. Baca introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction from 
  gross income to individuals for expenses paid in using mass transit 
                              facilities.

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

SECTION 1. DEDUCTION FOR EXPENSES FOR USE OF MASS TRANSIT FACILITIES.

    (a) In General.--Part VII of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to additional itemized 
deductions for individuals) is amended by redesignating section 222 as 
section 223 and by inserting after section 221 the following new 
section:

``SEC. 222. MASS TRANSIT EXPENSES.

    ``(a) General Rule.--In the case of an individual, there shall be 
allowed as a deduction for the taxable year an amount equal to the mass 
transit expenses paid by the taxpayer during the taxable year.
    ``(b) Mass Transit Expenses.--For purposes of this section, the 
term `mass transit expenses' means expenses for transportation of the 
taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or any dependent of the taxpayer on 
mass transit facilities (whether or not publicly owned). Such term 
shall not include any expense reimbursed by an employer to the extent 
such reimbursement is not includible in gross income under section 
132.''
    (b) Deduction Allowed Whether or Not Individual Itemizes Other 
Deductions.--Subsection (a) of section 62 of such Code is amended by 
inserting after paragraph (17) the following new paragraph:
            ``(18) Mass transit expenses.--The deduction allowed by 
        section 222.''
    (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for part VII of 
subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by striking the last 
item and inserting the following new items:

                              ``Sec. 222. Mass transit expenses.
                              ``Sec. 223. Cross reference.''
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
36

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1estate loans estate loans

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2006: Q1... 8.3 8.3 n.a. 7.5

 Q2... 8.7 8.8 n.a. 7.9

 Q3... 8.7 8.7 n.a. 7.8

 Q4... 8.7 8.7 n.a. 7.7

2007: Q1... 8.6 8.6 n.a. 7.7

 Q2... 8.6 8.7 n.a. 7.7

 Q3... 8.4 8.4 n.a. 7.5

 Q4... 7.9 7.8 n.a. 7.1

2008: Q1... 6.9 6.7 n.a. 6.4

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2006: Q1... 9.0 9.2 8.8 8.2

 Q2... 9.4 9.6 9.2 8.1

 Q3... 9.6 9.7 9.4 8.5

 Q4... 9.5 9.6 9.3 8.7

2007: Q1... 9.4 9.7 9.3 8.6

 Q2... 9.4 9.5 9.1 8.5

 Q3... 9.4 9.6 9.2 8.5

 Q4... 8.9 9.1 8.7 7.9

2008: Q1... 7.8 8.0 7.7 7.2

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2006: Q1... 8.9 9.1 8.7 8.4

 Q2... 9.0 9.2 8.8 8.8

 Q3... 9.3 9.2 8.8 8.6

 Q4... 9.3 9.3 8.9 8.4

2007: Q1... 9.1 9.0 8.6 8.3

 Q2... 8.9 8.9 8.7 8.5

 Q3... 8.7 8.6 8.2 8.2

 Q4... 8.2 7.9 7.6 7.5

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
37

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans (continued)

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1-estate loans estate loans

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.8 8.7 8.1

 Q2... n.a. 9.1 9.0 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 9.2 9.1 8.5

 Q4... n.a. 9.2 9.0 8.4

2007: Q1... n.a. 9.1 9.0 8.4

 Q2... n.a. 9.1 8.9 8.3

 Q3... n.a. 9.1 8.8 8.3

 Q4... n.a. 8.6 8.4 7.9

2008: Q1... n.a. 7.5 7.4 7.0

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.4 8.5 7.9

 Q2... n.a. 8.9 8.9 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 9.1 9.1 8.5

 Q4... n.a. 9.0 9.0 8.3

2007: Q1... n.a. 9.0 8.9 8.3

 Q2... n.a. 9.0 8.8 8.3

 Q3... n.a. 8.8 8.7 8.2

 Q4... n.a. 8.3 8.2 7.7

2008: Q1... n.a. 7.2 7.1 6.8

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2006: Q1... n.a. 9.0 8.7 8.2

 Q2... n.a. 9.2 8.9 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 9.1 9.0 8.4

 Q4... n.a. 9.0 9.1 8.3

2007: Q1... n.a. 8.9 8.8 8.3

 Q2... n.a. 8.9 8.8 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 8.7 8.6 8.0

 Q4... n.a. 8.0 8.2 7.8

2008: Q1... n.a. 7.2 7.4 7.2

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of

livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CEO CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



I, Bruce C. Edwards, President and Chief Executive Officer of Powerwave Technologies, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 28, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|Date: |  | October 27, 2003 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ BRUCE C. EDWARDS                 
|----- |  | ---------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|      |  |                  |  |  |  |     |  | Bruce C. Edwards                     
|      |  |                  |  | 
|      |  |                  |  |  |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|      |  |                  |  | 
|      |  |                  |  |  |  |     |  | Powerwave Technologies, Inc.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**483 KA 13-00990**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, DEJOSEPH, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHRISTOPHER MCCREA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MULDOON, GETZ & RESTON, ROCHESTER (GARY MULDOON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

DONALD G. O’GEEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WARSAW (VINCENT A. HEMMING OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Wyoming County Court (Michael F. Griffith, J.), rendered April 3, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of perjury in the first degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of perjury in the first degree (Penal Law § 210.15). We reject defendant’s contention that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered ( see People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248, 256). “County Court expressly ascertained from defendant that, as a condition of the plea, he was agreeing to waive his right to appeal, and the court did not conflate that right with those automatically forfeited by a guilty plea” ( People v Thompson , 83 AD3d 1535, 1535 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Villar , 115 AD3d 1361, 1361, lv denied 23 NY3d 1044). Defendant’s challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution is encompassed by his valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v Oberdorf , 136 AD3d 1291, 1292; People v Rosado , 70 AD3d 1315, 1316, lv denied 14 NY3d 892). In any event, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review because he did not move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction on that ground ( see Oberdorf , 136 AD3d at 1292; People v Wackwitz , 93 AD3d 1220, 1221, lv denied 19 NY3d 868).

Entered: June 10, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Edwin Maldonado, Appellant.

[807 NYS2d 87]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward M. Davidowitz, J.), rendered October 23, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree (two counts) and robbery in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 25 years, 25 years and 3Va to 7 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The prosecutor’s summation comment concerning the relationship between the two robberies for which defendant was being tried, and the trial court’s jury instruction on this subject, were proper in light of the similarities between the two crimes *(see e.g. People v Jason,*190 AD2d 689 [1993], *lv denied*81 NY2d 1015 [1993]).

A succession of attorneys represented defendant during most of the time in which his case was pending before the grand jury, and the record fails to support his claim that he was without counsel. Defendant’s claims concerning his attempt to testify before the grand jury, and the subsequent motion practice on that issue, do not warrant reversal *(see People v Wiggins,*89 NY2d 872 [1996]).

The court’s *Sandoval*ruling balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion *(see People v Hayes,*97 NY2d 203 [2002]). Defendant’s theft-related convictions were highly relevant to his credibility and therefore admissible, even though he was being tried for robbery *(see e.g. People v Johnson,*277 AD2d 177 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 784 [2001]), and none of his convictions was excessively remote in time *(see e.g. People v Starke,*237 AD2d 225, 226 [1997], *lv denied*90 NY2d 911 [1997]).

Trial counsel provided effective assistance under the state *424and. federal standards *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; *see also Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]). Although counsel did not move to reopen the *Wade*hearing upon learning that one of the robbery victims had described defendant as wearing a blue shirt, the same color he wore at a lineup, this did not deprive defendant of effective assistance. Such a motion would not have resulted in suppression *(see e.g. People v Shorter,*275 AD2d 253, 254 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 969 [2000]). The blue shirt was not so distinctive as to draw attention to defendant *(see People v Santos,*250 AD2d 413, 414 [1998], *lv denied*92 NY2d 905 [1998], *cert denied*525 US 1076 [1999]); moreover, one of the fillers also wore a blue shirt.

Defendant’s procedural challenge to his sentence is unpreserved *(see People v Samms,*95 NY2d 52, 57-58 [2000]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be unreviewable for lack of a sufficient record *(see People v Kinchen,*60 NY2d 772 [1983]), and meritless in any event *(see People v Rodriguez,*197 AD2d 355 [1993], *lv denied*82 NY2d 902 [1993]; *see also*Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3 [B] [6] [c]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Marlow, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0309

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

GRALEN EUGENE HOBBLE, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including March 7, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 28 2022

01/28/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0309
107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1906

AN ACT

To amend the Act that established the Pu’uhonua

O Honaunau National Historical Park to expandthe boundaries of that park.

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1906

AN ACT

To amend the Act that established the Pu’uhonua O

Honaunau National Historical Park to expand the

boundaries of that park.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1906 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pu‘uhonua o

3 Ho ̄naunau National Historical Park Addition Act of

4 2002’’.

5 SEC. 2. ADDITIONS TO PU‘UHONUA O HO ̄ NAUNAU NA6 TIONAL HISTORICAL PARK.

7 The first section of the Act of July 26, 1955 (69 Stat.

8 376, ch. 385; 16 U.S.C. 397), is amended—

9 (1) by striking ‘‘That, when’’ and inserting the

10 following:

11 ‘‘SECTION 1. (a) When’’; and

12 (2) by adding at the end thereof the following

13 new subsections:

14 ‘‘(b) The boundaries of Pu‘uhonua o Ho ̄naunau Na15 tional Historical Park are hereby modified to include ap16 proximately 238 acres of lands and interests therein with17 in the area identified as ‘Parcel A’ on the map entitled

18 ‘Pu‘uhonua o Ho ̄naunau National Historical Park Pro19 posed Boundary Additions, Ki‘ilae Village’, numbered

20 PUHO–P 415/82,013 and dated May, 2001.

21 ‘‘(c) The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to

22 acquire approximately 159 acres of lands and interests

23 therein within the area identified as ‘Parcel B’ on the map

24 referenced in subsection (b). Upon the acquisition of such

25 lands or interests therein, the Secretary shall modify the
3

•HR 1906 EH

1 boundaries of Pu‘uhonua o Ho ̄naunau National Historical

2 Park to include such lands or interests therein.’’.

3 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.

4 There are authorized to be appropriated such sums

5 as may be necessary to carry out this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives June 17, 2002.

Attest:

Clerk.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America,

Plaintiff

 

v. Case No. 08-cr-135-01-SM

Normand Forand,

 Defendant

O R D E R

Defendant Forand’s motion to continue the trial is granted (document no.

16). Trial has been rescheduled for the month of May 2009. Defendant Forand

shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later than March 19, 2009. On the

filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be effective. 

 The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial,

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Case 1:08-cr-00135-SM Document 17 Filed 03/06/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Final Pretrial Conference is scheduled for May 8, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. 

Jury selection will take place on May 19, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________

 Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

March 6, 2009

cc: James Dennehy, Esq.

Michael Zaino, SAUSA

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:08-cr-00135-SM Document 17 Filed 03/06/09 Page 2 of 2
Jurisdiction of
                                                      Incorporation
                                                      ------------------
First Tier Subsidiaries of Registrant:
American Trust Bank, N.A.                             United States
Frankford Bank, N.A.                                  United States
Keystone National Bank                                United States
Mid-State Bank and Trust Company                      Pennsylvania
Northern Central Bank                                 Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania National Bank and Trust Company          United States
Keystone Financial Unlimited                          Pennsylvania
Key Trust Company                                     Pennsylvania
Keystone CDC, Inc.                                    Pennsylvania
Keystone Financial Community Development              
  Corporation I, Inc.                                 Pennsylvania
Keystone Financial Life Insurance Company             Arizona
Keystone Investment Services, Inc.                    Delaware
Martindale Andres & Company                           Pennsylvania

Second Tier Subsidiaries of Registrant:
Keystone Financial Leasing Corporation                Pennsylvania
LBCMD Corporation                                     Delaware
Keystone Financial Mortgage Corporation               Pennsylvania
Keystone Brokerage, Inc.                              Pennsylvania
Key Investor Services, Inc.                           Maryland
Key Investor Services, Inc.                           Pennsylvania
Key Investor Services, Inc.                           West Virginia
ATB Holding Company, Inc.                             Delaware
ATB Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc.                Maryland

                                       100
<PAGE>