alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Julie CHALMERS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a municipal corporation, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 82-6112, 83-6092 and 83-6535.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Feb. 2, 1987.

Marcia Haber Kamine, Deputy City Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for the defendant-appellant.

*1374John B. Murdock, Santa Monica, Gal., for the plaintiff-appellee.

Before WALLACE, TANG and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

The opinion filed August 15, 1986, published at 796 F.2d 1205, is amended as follows:

At page 1212, footnote 4 is amended to read as follows:

> There is much confusion in the case law concerning contingent fees and contingent adjustments. *See, e.g., LaDuke v. Nelson,*762 F.2d 1318, 1333 (9th Cir.1985) (discussing circumstances justifying enhanced awards under Equal Access for Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412); *Moore v. Jas. H. Matthews & Co.,*682 F.2d 830, 841 n. 16 (9th Cir.1982) (an enhanced fee due to the contingent nature of a fee arrangement may be justified; however, award should not automatically be increased because of risks associated with contingent fee arrangement); *Hamner v. Rios,*769 F.2d at 1407 (the existence of a contingent fee arrangement is an element to consider in analyzing a fee petition); *Buxton v. Patel,*595 F.2d at 1185 n. 3 (same). Despite the confusion in the case law, it should be noted that contingent adjustments are not the same as a contingency fee arrangement. Contingency fee arrangements, like the one at issue in this case, are arrangements where an attorney’s fee is based on a percentage of the amount recovered by his client. Contingency adjustments are a percentage increase over and above the amount obtained by multiplying hours expended by hourly rate; contingency adjustments are specifically designed to reflect the risk that no fee may be obtained. *Blum,*465 U.S. at 903 n. *, 104 S.Ct. at 1551 n. * (Brennan, J., concurring). In discussing possible bases for an enhanced award, the Supreme Court has made reference to contingent adjustments, not contingent fee contracts. Chalmers’ counsel therefore misconstrued the significance of his contingent fee arrangement with his client when he argues that this arrangement provides an independent rationale for application of a multiplier.

The panel constituted above has voted to deny the petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b).

The petition for rehearing is denied, and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.
EX-35.1
(logo) MIDLAND    (logo) PNC
       LOAN              REAL ESTATE
       SERVICES


OFFICER CERTIFICATE

WF-RBS Commercial Mortgage Trust
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
Series 2011-C5

March 1, 2012

Pursuant to the requirements of that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement
(the "Agreement"), it is hereby certified that on behalf of PNC Bank, National
Association d/b/a Midland Loan Services as successor by merger to Midland Loan
Services, Inc. (the "Servicer"),
(i) a review of the Servicer's activities during the calendar year 2011 (the
"Reporting Period") and of its performance under the Agreement has been made
under the undersigned officer's supervision;
(ii) to the best of the undersigned officer's knowledge, based on such review,
the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all
material respects throughout the Reporting Period or, if there has been a
failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, each such
failure known to the undersigned officer and the nature and status thereof are
set forth below; and
(iii) the Servicer has not received any notice during the Reporting Period
regarding qualification, or challenging the status, of any REMIC formed pursuant
to the Agreement from the IRS or any other governmental agency or body.

Nature and Status of Failures: None.


PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCATION
d/ba MIDLAND LOAN SERVICES

/s/ Steven W. Smith
Steven W. Smith
Executive Vice President


Member of The PNC Financial Services Group
10851 Mastin Boulevard Overland Park, Kansas 66210
800-327-8083
www.pnc.com/midland
Exhibit 21.1



                                               LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
                                               (as of March 1, 2002)


Corporation                                                            State
------------                                                           -----

Commonwealth Premium Finance Corporation                               Kentucky
Equity Insurance Managers of Illinois, L.L.C.
     (d/b/a Irland & Rogers)                                           Illinois
Fiduciary Counsel, Inc.                                                Delaware
Fully Armed Productions, Inc.                                          Kentucky
Unified Banking Company                                                Federal
     Unified Trust Company National Association                        Federal
         Health Financial, Inc.                                        Kentucky
Unified Claims Service, Inc.                                           Kentucky
Unified Employee Services, Inc.                                        Delaware
Unified Financial Securities, Inc.                                     Indiana
Unified Fund Services, Inc.                                            Texas
Unified Insurance Administrators, Inc.                                 Kentucky
Unified Insurance Managers, Inc.                                       Kentucky
Unified Internet Services, Inc.                                        Indiana
Unified Investment Advisers, Inc.                                      Delaware
Unified Investment Services, Inc.                                      Kentucky
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          18,567
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          16,081
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    838,379
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,398,688
<ALLOWANCE>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,339,731
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,686,740
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            389,662
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           191
<OTHER-SE>                                     263,138
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,339,731
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 67,612
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               48,567
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               116,179
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              54,520
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,439
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           47,740
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,050
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               1,441
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 40,857
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,401
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,733
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.49
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.96
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,649
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 5,048
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      578
<RECOVERIES>                                        39
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,559
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          6,559
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10(b)  


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


        We
hereby consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 333-        , 811-4092) of our report dated March 19, 2003, relating to the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Protective Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries, which appears in such Registration Statement. We also consent to the use in
this Registration Statement of our report dated July 14, 2003, relating to the financial statements of First Variable Annuity Fund E, which appears in such Registration Statement. We
also consent to the reference to us under the heading "Independent Accountants" in such Registration Statement. 


/S/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Birmingham, Alabama

January 2, 2004
#### L.G., A Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D10-3854.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 1, 2011.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Colby Nicole Ferris, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

*754Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PALMER, J.

L.G. appeals the trial court’s order incorporating the Department of Juvenile Justice’s community based treatment plan into his probation for lewd and lascivious conduct. We find no reversible error and affirm. However, we remand for the entry of an order clarifying where L.G. shall live. L.G. is required to follow both the psychosexual evaluation recommendations and the community based treatment plan as conditions of his probation. The psy-chosexual evaluation provided that he remain in the residence of his mother’s cousin, but the community based treatment plan provided that he live with his mother. Accordingly, clarification of the court’s ruling is required.

AFFIRMED, REMAND for clarification.

TORPY and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 23.1  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM  We have issued our reports dated March 9, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Force Protection, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.  We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Force Protection, Inc. on Forms S-8 (No. 333-139977, effective January 12, 2007; File No. 333-155534, effective November 21, 2008 and File No. 333-162943, effective November 6, 2009).  /s/ Grant Thornton LLP  Columbia, South Carolina  March 9, 2011
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 184 (Thursday, September 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58019-58020]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23750]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Notice of Intent to Rule on Request to Release Airport Property 
at the Kearney Municipal Airport, Kearney, NE

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Request to Release Airport Property.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the 
release of land at the Keamey Municipal Airport under the provisions of 
Section 125 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment Reform Act for 
the 21st Century (AIR 21).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 25, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to 
the FAA at the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 
Central Region, Airports Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 
64106-2325.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be 
mailed or delivered to Michael J. Tye, City Attorney, City of Kearney, 
1419 Central Avenue, P.O. Box 636, Kearney, NE. 68848-0636.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicoletta Oliver, Airports Compliance 
Specialist, FAA, Central Region, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106-
2325, (816) 329-2642. The request to release property may be reviewed 
in person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public 
comment on the request to release property at the Kearney Municipal 
Airport under the provisions of AIR21.
    On September 9, 2010, the FAA determined that the request to 
release property at the Kearney Municipal Airport, submitted by the 
City of Kearney, met the procedural requirements of the Federal 
Aviation Administration. The FAA will approve or disapprove the 
request, in whole or in part, no later than November 9, 2010.
    The following is a brief overview of the request: The City of 
Kearney requests the release of approximately 7.09 acres of airport 
property, as well as structures located on this property. The land is 
currently not being used for aeronautical purposes. The purpose of this 
release is to sell the land to Delux Manufacturing Co. Inc. for use as 
a manufacturing facility.
    Any person may inspect the request in person at the FAA office 
listed above

[[Page 58020]]

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the application, 
notice and other documents that are relevant to the request, in person 
at the City of Kearney, Keamey, Nebraska.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 9, 2010.
Jim A. Johnson,
Manager, Airports Division, Central Region.
[FR Doc. 2010-23750 Filed 9-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S7244]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

  REPORT RELATIVE TO EMIGRATION LAWS AND POLICIES OF THE REPUBLIC OF 
               ROMANIA--MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT--PM 51

  The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message 
from the President of the United States, together with an accompanying 
report; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

To the Congress of the United States:
  I hereby transmit a report concerning emigration laws and policies of 
the Republic of Romania as required by subsections 402(b) and 409(b) of 
Title IV of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (``the Act''). I have 
determined that Romania is in full compliance with the criteria in 
subsections 402(a) and 409(a) of the Act. As required by Title IV, I 
will provide the Congress with periodic reports regarding Romania's 
compliance with these emigration standards.
                                                  William J. Clinton.  
  The White House, May 19, 1995.

                          ____________________
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

                     Certification Pursuant to Exchange Act
                    Rule 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

     In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of First Virtual  Communications,
Inc. and  subsidiary  (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June
30,  2005,  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date
hereof (the "Report"),  I, Gregory Sterling,  Chief Restructuring Officer of the
Company,  certify,  to the best of my  knowledge,  pursuant to Exchange Act Rule
15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     i.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     ii.  The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.

     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 First Virtual
Communications,  Inc. and will be retained by First Virtual Communications, Inc.
and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  or its staff upon
request.

Date: December 23, 2005                   FIRST VIRTUAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                                          By: /s/ Gregory Sterling
                                              ----------------------------
                                              Gregory Sterling
                                              Chief Restructuring Officer
                                              (Duly Authorized Officer and
                                              Principal Financial Officer)
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Certifications**

 

I, J.A. Cardwell, Sr., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Petro Financial Corporation; 

 

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 tomake 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 financialcondition, 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 officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 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 consolidatedsubsidiaries, 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 theeffectiveness 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 mostrecent fiscal quarter 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 overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of 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 financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect 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 controlover financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 13, 2004
#### Rita PATIN v. STATE of Louisiana, et al.

No. 2011-C-2844.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 20, 2012.

In re Patín, Rita; — Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated March 2, 2012, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 238,068; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 11-290.

*1256Not considered. See Supreme Court Rule IX, Section 6.
#### Patricia Ewing HENDRICK, Individually and as Trustee of The Robert Ewing Trust Under Will v. Benton PATTERSON, Jr., AIA, and Neff Construction, Inc.

No. 2011-CC-0675.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 6, 2011.

In re Neff Construction Inc.; —Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 494,150; to *127the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 46277-CW.

Denied.
Exhibit 34.8



|     |  |                                                                                                                              
|---- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | Plante & Moran, PLLC
10 South Riverside Plaza 9th Floor Chicago, IL 60606
Tel: 312.207.1040 Fax:
312.207.1066 plantemoran.com

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors

National Tax Search, LLC

We have examined National Tax Search, LLC (the Company) compliance with Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB Servicing
Criteria, set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Security and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for the National Tax Search TaxQ system (the Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015. The Company has determined
that only certain servicing criteria, 1112(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)1(iv), 1122(d)2(ii), 1122(d)2(v), 1122(d)2(vi), 1122(d)2(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), and 1122(d)(4)(xii), are applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by
this report. The Company has determined that the remaining servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the SEC Regulation AB are not applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by this report.

Management is responsible for the Companys compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements
assertion about the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included a selection of a
sample of transactions and compliance activities related to the Platform during the examination period and determining whether the Company processed those transactions and performed those activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Our
testing of selected transactions and compliance activities was limited to calculations, reports, and activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures did not include determining whether errors may have
occurred prior to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2015 for the Platform is fairly stated in all material respects.

/s/ Plante & Moran, PLCC

Chicago, IL

January 18, 2016



LOGO