alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
    THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
    SEPTEMBER 30, 1997  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS
    ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-MOS            3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1997      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1997      JUN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                   SEP-30-1997      SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                           1,158             1,158
<SECURITIES>                         0                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                        0                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                         0                 0
<INVENTORY>                          0                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 3,268             3,268
<PP&E>                         145,555           145,555
<DEPRECIATION>                  33,541            33,541
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 116,440           116,440
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            5,201             5,201
<BONDS>                         64,987            64,987
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0                 0
<PREFERRED>                          0                 0
<COMMON>                            40                40
<OTHER-SE>                      23,821            23,821
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   116,440           116,440
<SALES>                              0                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                11,536               528
<CGS>                                0                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        0                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 7,896               329
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               1,732               103
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  1,136                96
<INCOME-TAX>                         0                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              1,136                96
<DISCONTINUED>                       0                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0                 0
<CHANGES>                            0                 0
<NET-INCOME>                     1,136                96
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      .37               .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .37               .16
        

</TABLE>
| (logo) **ncb**  National Cooperative Bank    | 2011 Crystal Drive  Suite, 8oo  Arlington, VA 22202 |
|---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|

 

 

February6, 2019

 

 

RBSCommercial Funding, Inc. as Depositor

600Washington Blvd.

Stamford,CT 06901

 

RE:          AnnualStatement as to Compliance

                WFRBS2014 C21

 

DearSir/Madam:

 

Inaccordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement entered into in connectionwith the issuance of the Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series2014-C21, as an authorized officer of National Cooperative Bank, N.A., formerlyNCB, FSB (the “NCB Master Servicer”), I hereby certify pursuant to Section11.12 thereof that:

 

a.       Areview of the activities of the NCB Master Servicer during the precedingcalendar year (the “Reporting Period”) and of its performance under the Poolingand Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

b.       Tothe best of my knowledge, based on these reviews, the NCB Master Servicer hasfulfilled all obligations under this agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

Pleasenote that the annual financial statement will be sent under separate cover onor before March 31, 2019.

 

 

Bestregards,

/s/Karyn Mann

KarynMann

SeniorVice President, Investor Compliance

NationalCooperative Bank, N.A.
## COURT OF APPEALS SECO ND DISTRICT OF T EXAS FORT WORTH N O
. 2
- 1 0
- 0 2 4
- C V T O K A G E N E R A L C O N T R A C T O R S , A P P E L L A N T L T D
. V
. H I D A L G O I N D U S T R I A L S E R V I C E S , A P P E L L E E I N C
.

- - - - - - - - - - F R O M T H E 3 4 2 N D D I S T R I C T C O U R T O F T A R R A N T C O U N T Y

- - - - - - - - - - 

### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 1 

### A N D J U D G M E N T

- - - - - - - - - - W e h a v e c o n s i d e r e d a p p e l l a n t ’ s “ U n o p p o s e d M o t i o n T o W i t h d r a w N o t i c e O f A p p e a l A n d D i s m i s s A p p e a l
. ” I t i s t h e c o u r t ’ s o p i n i o n t h a t t h e m o t i o n
s h o u l d b e g r a n t e d ; t h e r e f o r e , w e d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l
. S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 4 2
. 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) , 4 3
. 2 ( f )
. C o s t s o f t h e a p p e a l s h a l l b e p a i d b y a p p e l l a n t , f o r w h i c h l e t e x e c u t i o n i s s u e . S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 4 2
. 1 ( d )
. P E R C U R I A M P A N E L : G A R D N E R , W A L K E R , a n d M C C O Y , J J
. D E L I V E R E D : F e b r u a r y 2 5 , 2 0 1 0

1  S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 4 7
. 4
.
Exhibit 10.9

   

  HEARTLAND MEDIA ACQUISITION CORP.

      3282 Northside Pkwy, Suite 275

      Atlanta, GA 30327

   

  October 27, 2021

   

  Heartland Sponsor LLC

      3282 Northside Pkwy, Suite 275

      Atlanta, GA 30327

   

  		Re:	Notice of Cancellation of Shares of Common Stock


   

  Notice is hereby given to Heartland Sponsor LLC (the “Stockholder”), and the
      Stockholder hereby acknowledges and agrees that, effective immediately, Heartland Media Acquisition Corp. (the “Corporation”) will cancel 1,437,500 shares of the Corporation’s Class B common stock, par value $0.0001 (the “Common Stock”)
      held by the Stockholder, so as to maintain the ownership of the Corporation’s initial stockholders at 20% of the outstanding shares of Common Stock upon consummation of the Corporation’s initial public offering.

   

  Very truly yours,

   

  	 	HEARTLAND MEDIA ACQUISITION CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Robert S. Prather, Jr.


  	 	Name: 	Robert S. Prather, Jr.
	 	Title:	Chief Executive Officer


   

  Agreed and acknowledged as of the date first written above:

   

  

  	
          HEARTLAND SPONSOR LLC

        	 
	 	 	 
	By: 	/s/ Robert S. Prather, Jr.	 


  	Name: 	Robert S. Prather, Jr.	 
	Title:	
          Managing Member
#### Roosevelt CARROLL, Jr., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D10-4478.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 19, 2011.

Roosevelt Carroll, Jr., pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition is granted and Roosevelt Carroll, Jr., is hereby afforded belated appeal from the order of the Circuit Court for Bradford County denying postconviction relief in that court’s case number 2002-CF-319-A. Upon issuance of mandate in this cause, a copy of this opinion will be provided to the clerk of the circuit *1093court who shall treat it as a notice of appeal. Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(c)(5)(D).

PETITION GRANTED.

WOLF, KAHN, and THOMAS, JJ„ concur.
#### Noretta THOMAS and Demetrice Butler, Each Individually, and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. A. WILBERT & SONS, INC., L.L.C. and XYZ Insurance Company c/w Troy Robichaux, Shannon Robichaux, Michael J. Tuminello, Sr., and Olive D. Tuminello v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Health and Hospitals and through the Department of Environmental Quality, and Dow Chemical Company.

No. 2011-CC-0068.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 10, 2011.

In re Dow Chemical Company; Dupree, Ivy; —Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberville, 18th Judicial District Court Divs. A, B, Nos. 66,803, 55,127; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2011 CW 0017.

Stay denied. Writ denied.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the Fifth Circuit

_____________________________________

No. 96-60624

_____________________________________

PATRICK A. BOYLE,

Petitioner,

VERSUS

CONTINENTAL GRAIN COMPANY, ET AL.,

Respondents.

______________________________________________________

Petition for Review of Final Order of Benefits Review Board

(94-2641)

______________________________________________________
May 7, 1997 Before DAVIS, EMILIO GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

In this appeal from an order of the Benefits Review Board, the

employee challenges the ALJ's finding (which was affirmed without

decision by the Benefits Review Board) that suitable alternate

employment was available to the employee. The ALJ found that the

employer had demonstrated that several jobs were available to Mr.

Boyle which he was capable of performing that would all ow him to

e arn more than he was earning at his 29-hour per week job with2

Hobby Hut . One of these jobs was in newspaper sales in the New

Orleans area. It paid $7.10 an hour for a 29-hour week and would

yield Mr. Boyle $205.90 per week.

Mr. Boyle argues that the ALJ erred in concluding that he

would receive $205.90 per week from the newspaper job because this

job required him to use his personal automobile and the ALJ's

computation did not consider automobile expenses. However, the

employee did not present evidence that automobile expenses are not

reimbursed. The only evidence on this point was from the

rehabil i tation counselor who testified that she assumed these

expenses were reimbursed but had made no specific investigation of

this point. We are persuaded that the ALJ was entitled to infer

from this expert's testimony that ordinarily, in employment of this

type, the employer reimburses the employee's automobile expenses.

So regardless of which party had the burden of proof on this issue,

substantial evidence supported the ALJ's finding.

AFFIRMED.
#### Calvin NEAL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D09-742.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 9, 2010.

Calvin Neal, Raiford, pro se.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PALMER, J.

Calvin Neal appeals the final order entered by the trial court denying his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Based upon the State’s concession that an evidentiary hearing is required to address Neal’s claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform the trial court during the court’s *84Richardson1 inquiry of relevant case law concerning the State’s non-disclosure of Neal’s statement, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on this issue. As to all other issues raised by Neal, we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

MONACO, C.J. and SAWAYA, J„ concur.

1

. *See Richardson v. State,*246 So.2d 771 (Fla.1971).
1 Former President George W. Bush was named as the original lead respondent in all of the above-captioned cases. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), the Court automatically substitutes his successor, President Barack H. Obama, as the new lead respondent. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ADEL HAMLILY, Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 05-0763 (JDB) BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., 1 Respondents.
WALEED SAEED BN SAEED ZAID, et al., Petitioners, v. Civil Action No. 05-1646 (JDB) BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., Respondents.

ABDUL HAMID ABDUL SALAM AL-GHIZZAWI, Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 05-2378 (JDB) BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., Respondents.

ORDERPursuant to the December 22, 2008 Case Management Order entered in the abovecaptioned cases, the Court is currently reviewing the parties' submissions in anticipation of a ruling regarding the appropriate definition of "enemy combatant" for use in these habeas cases. The Court recognizes, however, that the new Presidential administration may wish to review the Government's current position regarding the appropriate definition of "enemy combatant" to be used in these and other habeas cases involving Guantanamo Bay detainees. Accordingly, the-2- Court invites Respondents to submit any refinement of their position on the appropriate definition of "enemy combatant" by not later than February 9, 2009. SO ORDERED. /s/ John D. Bates JOHN D. BATES United States District Judge Date: January 22, 2009
(logo)TORCHLIGHT

 

 

**ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

 

CERTIFICATIONJ.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-C20, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through CertificatesSeries 2014-C20 (the “Trust”)

 

I, WilliamA. Clarkson, on behalf of Torchlight Loan Services, LLC, as special servicer(the “Certifying Servicer”), certify to J.P. MorganChase CommercialMortgage Securities Corp. and its officers, directors and affiliates, and withthe knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification, that:

 

I (orServicing Officers under my supervision) have reviewed the CertifyingServicer’s activities for the fiscal year 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) and theCertifying Servicer’s performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement;and

 

Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement inall material respects during the Reporting Period.  

 

 

Date:February 28, 2019

 

TORCHLIGHTLOAN SERVICES, LLC, as Special Servicer

 

 

By: /s/ William A. Clarkson

Name: William A. Clarkson

Title: Authorized Signatory

 

 

280 Park Avenue, New York,NY 10017

T 212.883.2800  F 212.883.2560

E info@torchlightloanservices.com

www.torchlightinvestors.com
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



I, Scott Chichester, Chief Financial Officer
of Adeptpros Inc. (Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



|  |                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended March 31, 2015 (Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



|  |                                                                                                                                                                                       
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.





|Date: February 24, 2016 | 
|----------------------- | 
|                        | 
|                        | 
|                        | 
|                        | 
|                        |
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gisele GANAWAY, Appellant.

No. 80-1200.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted May 15, 1980.

Decided May 21, 1980.

*700Joseph Ross, Little Rock, Ark., on brief, for appellant.

George W. Proctor, U. S. Atty., Terry L. Derden, Asst. U. S. Atty., and Michael Alexander, Legal Intern, Little Rock, Ark., on brief, for appellee.

Before STEPHENSON, HENLEY and McMILLIAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Gisele Ganaway appeals a judgment of revocation of probation and commitment order entered March 10,1980 in the Eastern District of Arkansas, The Honorable Elsi-jane T. Roy, Judge.

In September, 1978 appellant entered her plea of guilty to a charge of forging an endorsement on a United States Savings Bond in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 495. Although appellant had a prior sentence to finish serving in a state prison, Judge Roy found that appellant, who was twenty years of age, was a fit subject for probation as a youth offender. Accordingly, imposition of sentence was suspended and appellant was placed on probation for a period of three years to commence upon her release from state prison.

By June, 1979 appellant was in trouble again. She was arrested in company of a person known to her to be a convicted felon and charged with possession of a controlled substance and with possession of a .45 caliber automatic pistol found in her purse.

A month later she was charged with robbery and two months later she fled the district according to her statement “believing that I was gonna be violated and sent to the joint.” She went first to Chicago and from there to Los Angeles where she was found after several months had elapsed.

On appeal counsel suggests that the probation officer who handled the case might not have communicated adequately the conditions of probation and that appellant feared the officer and perhaps never really understood what the officer was trying to explain.

We have explored the transcript of the revocation hearing at length and find no evidence of dereliction on the part of the officer and no insufficiency of understanding on the part of appellant. While it does appear from her own statement that appellant feared revocation of probation, that same statement reflects knowledge that she had violated the terms of her probation in committing public offenses and associating with known felons.

Upon revocation the court had the option of imposing a prison sentence just as it had that option when it placed appellant on probation, *United States*v. *Rodgers,*588 F.2d 651 (8th Cir. 1978). The sentence imposed was lawful and we are not inclined to disturb it, *United States v. Campbell,*619 F.2d 765 (8th Cir., 1980).

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 194 (Thursday, October 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 62173]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25333]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7196]


In the Matter of the Review of the Designation of Jemaah Islamiya 
(JI and Other Aliases) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization Pursuant to 
Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended

    Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled in this 
matter pursuant to Section 219(a)(4)(C) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(4)(C)) (``INA''), and in 
consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the 
Treasury, I conclude that the circumstances that were the basis for the 
2004 re-designation of the aforementioned organization as a foreign 
terrorist organization have not changed in such a manner as to warrant 
revocation of the designation and that the national security of the 
United States does not warrant a revocation of the designation.
    Therefore, I hereby determine that the designation of the 
aforementioned organization as a foreign terrorist organization, 
pursuant to Section 219 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1189), shall be 
maintained.
    This determination shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: September 28, 2010.
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-25333 Filed 10-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

MURRAY WITCHER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.  No. 01-2111 JOSEPH W. WESTPHAL, Secretary,

United States Department of the

Army,

Defendant-Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Andre M. Davis, District Judge.

(CA-00-2676-AMD)

Submitted: June 27, 2002

Decided: September 12, 2002

Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Solaman G. Lippman, Richard H. Semsker, Shannon M. Salb, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Thomas M. DiBiagio, United States

Attorney, Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 

OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Murray Witcher appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his

employment discrimination action for failure to comply with Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8(a)(2), and denying his motions filed under Fed. R. Civ. P.

59(e), and for reconsideration. Witcher asserts the district court erred

in dismissing his complaint for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P.

8. Although Witcher’s amended complaint did not comply with the

district court’s instruction to allege his claims in one-sentence paragraphs, nor was the complaint a model of clarity, it was adequate to

inform the Defendant of the nature of Witcher’s claims and the factual basis for those claims. Such is all that is required under Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., ___ U.S. ___, 122 S. Ct. 922,

998 (2002). Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s dismissal

order and remand for further proceedings.* We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid

the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED

*We express no opinion about the merits of Witcher’s claims. 

2 WITCHER v. WESTPHAL
ex10-1.htm


    Exhibit 10.1


    AGREEMENT

    


    


         THIS
AGREEMENT is made this 20th day of
February, 2008, by and between 1st &
10 Properties, Corp., and 1st &
10 Investment Corp.

    


         As
it will be so stated in THIS AGREEMENT, 1st &
10 Investment Corp., will be the exclusive property management company for
1st
& 10 Properties, Corp., acting as a fully functioning company in the
following manner.

    


    
      
        
          	
                  1.

                	
                   To
      collect all rents due by the tenants

                
	
                  2.

                	
                   To
      provide all property related services to tenant.

                
	
                  3.

                	
                   To
      work in a coordinated working relationship with all associations related
      to the rented
      properties.

                
	
                  4.

                	
                   To
      keep accurate records of all income and outward expenses related to the
      rented properties.

                
	
                  5.

                	
                   To
      supply adequate personnel to cover all functions stated
    above.

                
	
                  6.

                	
                   1st
      & 10 Investment Corp will be compensated by the prevailing market
      commission rate for services
rendered.

                


        

      

    

    


         By
virtue of THIS AGREEMENT, and as evidenced by the signatures below, this
instrument shall be binding and interpreted according to the laws of
Florida.  This agreement shall be binding for a minimum of no less
than twelve months of the effective date and shall terminate upon discretion of
Joseph Kandel, CEO of 1st &
10 Properties, Corp, or as determined by a majority vote of the Board of
Directors of 1st &
10 Properties, Corp or as otherwise designated.

    


    


    


    


    


    
      	
              /s/
      Barbara
      Shapiro                          
      2/20/08

            	/s/ Joseph
      Kandel                           
      2/20/08
	
              On
      behalf of 1st
      & 10 Properties, Corp./Date

            	
              On
      behalf of 1st
      & 10 Investment Corp./Date

            
	
              Barbara
      Shapiro

            	
              Joseph
      Kandel