alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | Corporate Trust Services

MAC R1204-010 

9062 Old Annapolis Road 

Columbia, MD 21045 

 

Tel:  410 884 2000 

Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation 

60 Wall Street 

New York, New York 10005 

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for COMM 2014-CCRE18 Mortgage Trust 

       Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates 

 

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 2014 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the "Reporting Period"): 

 

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and 

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

 

 

March 9, 2015 

 

 

/s/Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH 

Vice President 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
#### Richard SHIVER, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D10-1084.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 30, 2010.

Rehearing Denied May 13, 2010.

Richard Shiver, pro se, Petitioner.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

*43PER CURIAM.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits.

BENTON, VAN NORTWICK, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 720 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 13, 2017 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

AN ACT 

To amend Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

to improve attorney accountability, and for other purposes. 

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


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 720 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lawsuit Abuse Reduc3 tion Act of 2017’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ATTORNEY ACCOUNTABILITY. 

5 (a) SANCTIONS UNDER RULE 11.—Rule 11(c) of the 

6 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is amended— 

7 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘may’’ and in8 serting ‘‘shall’’; 

9 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘Rule 5’’ and 

10 all that follows through ‘‘motion.’’ and inserting 

11 ‘‘Rule 5.’’; and 

12 (3) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘situated’’ 

13 and all that follows through the end of the para14 graph and inserting ‘‘situated, and to compensate 

15 the parties that were injured by such conduct. Sub16 ject to the limitations in paragraph (5), the sanction 

17 shall consist of an order to pay to the party or par18 ties the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred 

19 as a direct result of the violation, including reason20 able attorneys’ fees and costs. The court may also 

21 impose additional appropriate sanctions, such as 

22 striking the pleadings, dismissing the suit, or other 

23 directives of a non-monetary nature, or, if warranted 

24 for effective deterrence, an order directing payment 

25 of a penalty into the court.’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 720 RFS 

1 (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act 

2 or an amendment made by this Act shall be construed to 

3 bar or impede the assertion or development of new claims, 

4 defenses, or remedies under Federal, State, or local laws, 

5 including civil rights laws, or under the Constitution of 

6 the United States. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 10, 

2017. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
585 A.2d 408

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. LARRY MITCHELL.

October 30, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

GRACIELA QUINONEZ RIVERA,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 19

- 10029

D.C. No. 3:12

- cr

- 00874

- RS

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Richard Seeborg, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 19, 2019 **

Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Graciela Quinonez Rivera appeals pro se from the district court’s order

denying her motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rivera argues that Amendment 782 to th e Guidelines lowered her base

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

AUG 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 19

- 10029

offense level by two, and therefore authorized the district court to reduce her

sentence . We review de novo whether a district court ha d authority to modify a

sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See U nited States v. Spears

, 8 24 F.3d 908

, 91 3

(9th Cir. 201 6 ). The district court correctly concluded that it did not have that

authority because , even after the Amendment, Rivera’s base offense level

remain ed 38 given the large drug quantity involved in her offense

. See U.S.S.G.

§ 2D1.1(c)(1) (2014)

. Because Amendment 782 did not lower Rivera’s applicable

guideline range, t he district court d id not err in denying her motion

. See U.S.S.G.

§ 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); Spears , 824 F.3d at 9 16

.

In light of this disposition, we do no t reach the government’s alternate

argument.

AFFIRMED.
585 A.2d 325

#### IN THE MATTER OF ANTHONY CABELO, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

February 11, 1991.

*296ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having reported to the Court, recommending that ANTHONY CABELO of NEWARK, who was admitted to the Bar of this State in 1975, be publicly reprimanded for failing to pursue diligently a matter before the Immigration and Naturalization Service on behalf of a client, in violation of *RPC*1.3, and for failing to keep his client reasonably informed about the status of the matter, in violation of *RPC*1.4;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the report of the Disciplinary Review Board is adopted and ANTHONY CABELO is hereby publicly reprimanded; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall reimburse the Ethics Financial Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.
584 A.2d 241

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOSEPH MICHAEL AMATEL.

June 11, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
(logo) ncb

National Cooperative Bank

 

 

February 26, 2015

 

 

 

RBS Commercial Funding, Inc. as Depositor

Attn: Jim Barnard

600 Washington Blvd. 

Stamford, CT 06901

 

RE:          Annual Statement as to Compliance

WFRBS 2014 C21

 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

 

In accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement entered into in connection with the issuance of the Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014- C21, as an authorized officer of National Cooperative Bank, N.A., formerly NCB, FSB (the “NCB Master Servicer”), I hereby certify pursuant to Section 11.12 thereof that:

 

a .   A review of the activities of the NCB Master Servicer during the preceding calendar year (the “Reporting Period”) and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

b.   To the best of my knowledge, based on these reviews, the NCB Master Servicer has fulfilled all obligations under this agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

Please note that the annual financial statement will be sent under separate cover on or before March 31, 2015.

 

Best regards,

 

/s/ Karyn Mann

Karyn Mann

Senior Vice President, Investor Compliance

National Cooperative Bank, N.A.
584 A.2d 203

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ROBERT W. FREEMYER.

May 1, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
#### Tamara ACKERMAN, Appellant, v. MIAMI RESCUE MISSION, INC., d/b/a Broward Outreach Center, Appellee.

No. 4D10-2891.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 24, 2010.

Neil Rose and Dara L. Schottenfeld of Bernstein, Chackman, Liss & Rose, Hollywood, and Russel Lazega of the Law Office of Russel Lazega, North Miami, for appellant.

Shelley H. Leinicke of Wicker, Smith, O’Hara, McCoy *&*Ford, P.A., Ft. Lauder-dale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this negligence action involving a trip and fall at the Broward Outreach Center, a homeless shelter, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant Center. In this appeal of the summary judgment, the Center has filed a notice of consent to this court entering a decision “remanding this case to the trial court with instructions to vacate the summary final judgment that is the subject of this appeal.” Upon a review the record, we accept appellee’s concession of error and reverse.

*173*Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.*

STEVENSON, DAMOORGIAN and GERBER, JJ., concur.
585 A.2d 361

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. PATRICIA GILES.

September 4, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
A93A0327.

#### HORNE et al. v. CARE MORE, INC.

(431 SE2d 480)

Johnson, Judge.

Tommy Horne slipped and fell while on the premises of Care More, Inc. d/b/a Macon Health Care Center. Tommy and Mary Horne filed a complaint against Care More for injuries allegedly caused by the fall. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Care More. The trial court made the verdict the judgment of the court. The Hornes appeal.

1. The Hornes contend that the court erred in charging the jury on the defense of accident.1 “The defense of accident in this state is to be confined to its strict sense as an occurrence which takes place in the absence of negligence and for which no one would be liable. Unless there is evidence authorizing a finding that the occurrence was an ‘accident’ as thus defined, a charge on that defense is error.” (Citations, punctuation and emphasis omitted.) *Whisanant v. Northeast Ga. Med. Center,*202 Ga. App. 526, 527 (414 SE2d 739) (1992). Although there was evidence that Horne’s fall might have been the result of Care More’s negligence, the jury also could have concluded that the fall was not proximately caused by the negligence of any party. The jury could have found from the evidence that Horne slipped in a puddle of urine, which had only been on the floor a few minutes and about which Care More had no knowledge prior to Horne’s fall. The jury was authorized to conclude that the urine on the floor was an unforeseeable occurrence. “Where the jury is authorized under the alternatives submitted by the evidence to find that the [fall] was not proximately caused by negligence but could have resulted from an unforeseen or unexplained cause, there is ample reason to give a charge on the law of accident.” (Citations and punctua*719tion omitted.) *Adams v. Finlayson,*199 Ga. App. 821, 822 (1) (406 SE2d 227) (1991); see also *Greene v. Wright,*200 Ga. App. 125, 126 (1) (407 SE2d 68) (1991). The court did not err in charging the jury on accident.

Decidied May 25, 1993.

*J. O’Quinn Lindsey,*for appellants.

*Tittsworth & Grabbe, John C. Grabbe IV,*for appellee.

2. The Hornes enumerate that the court erred in failing to give their requested charge on distraction. Because the request is not contained in the record, we cannot address the merits of this enumeration. *Jones v. Livingston,*203 Ga. App. 99, 102 (3) (416 SE2d 142) (1992).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Blackburn and Smith, JJ., concur.*

1

 The Supreme Court’s holding in *Tolbert v. Duckworth,*262 Ga. 622 (423 SE2d 229) (1992), that the jury charge on accident should not be given in civil cases after January 21, 1993, is inapplicable to the instant case, which was tried from January 13-15, 1992.
EXHIBIT 13.1


CERTIFICATION





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of Orion Engineered Carbons S.A. (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date:     March 3, 2016





By:    _ /s/ Jack Clem __________________________


Jack Clem


Chief Executive Officer
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                          Washington, DC  20549

                             Form 10-QSB\A

[X]    QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
       OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 1996

Commission file number 1-13162

                               EMPIRIC ENERGY, INC.
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


            Texas                                     75-2455467
(State or other jurisdiction of                     (IRS Employer 
incorporation or organization)                      Identification No.)


    10300 N. Central Expressway
     Suite 426, Dallas, Texas                                   75231
(Address of principal executive offices)                      (Zip Code)


                               (214) 265-8392                 
           (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)



   Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that
the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

           Yes __X__                                No _____



                               PART II.  OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 6.  EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.

     There were no reports filed.

     In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.

Date:  June 12, 1997

                               EMPIRIC ENERGY, INC.



                               By:_____Clyde E. Skeen______________
                                    Clyde E. Skeen
                                    Chief Financial Officer



                               By:_____James J. Ling______________
                                    James J. Ling
                                    President
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension Partners  1993-D,  Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of operations con-
tained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         1,074
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  12,326
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               13,400
<PP&E>                                         3,480,799
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,142,466)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,351,733
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,060
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,347,673
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,351,733
<SALES>                                        49,865
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               49,870
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  49,505<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (12,328)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (12,328)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (12,328)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes gene al and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
#### David L. McGREW *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 98-426

966 S.W.2d 266

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered May 7, 1998

*W. Hunter Williams,*for appellant.

No response.

Per Curiam.

Pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 2-2 (1997), appellant, David L. McGrew, by his attorney, W. Hunter Williams, Jr., filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Mr. Williams admitted in the motion that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part. We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. *See In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265*Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam). Accordingly, the motion is granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. *Id.*
585 A.2d 404

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JAMES CHAPPLE, JR.

October 30, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, Mark R. Hollinger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the quarterly report of Merix Corporation on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended November 25, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such quarterly report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all
material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Merix Corporation.



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ MARK R. HOLLINGER                
|    |  | Mark R. Hollinger                    
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
|    |  | (Principal Executive Officer)        

January 4, 2007
584 A.2d 226

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ALISON TOWEY.

May 30, 1990.

Cross-petition for certification denied. (See 244 *N.J.Super.*582, 583 A.2d 352)
585 A.2d 395

#### ESTHER LANZET v. LAWRENCE M. GREENBERG, M.D.

October 16, 1990.

Petition for certification granted. (See 243 *N.J.Super.*218, 579 A.2d 309)
# ANNIE REBECCA ELLIOTT
DISTRICT CLERK

MAILING 301 Jackson Street Richmond, Texas 77469 PHYSICAL 1422 Eugene Heimann Circle

Richmond, Texas 77469 Telephone: (281) 341-4502 Facsimile: (281) 341-4519 http://www. fortbendcountytx .gov Departments – District Clerk

July 08, 2015

To: The Clerk of the Court of Appeals for the First Court of Appeals Supreme Judicial District (Civil Appeal)

Trial Court No: 13-DCV-208485 From the 400 th Judicial District Court Fort Bend County, Texas
Judge Presiding: Maggie Perez-Jaramillo Court Reporter: Karen Rothman

Appellant(s): Pablo Rion Y Asociados, S.A. De C.V. 

### VS Appellee(s): David Dauajare and Gabriela Martinez De Dauajare

Attorney for Appellant(s) Attorney For Appellee(s)
Daniel W. Jackson Jennette E Deponte
SBN: 00796817 SBN: 00795935
The Jackson Law Firm 3900 Essex Lane Suite 1116
Houston TX 77027 Mccathern Mooty Hyde Grinke Llp
3710 Rawlins Suite 1600
Dallas TX 75219 Telephone: 713-522-4435 Telephone: 214-741-2662
Facsimile: 713-527-8850 Facsimile: 214-741-4717 E-mail: daniel@jacksonlaw.tx.com E-mail: jdeponte@mccathernlaw.co Attorney for: Pablo Rion Y Asociados, S.A. de C.V., Appellant Attorney for: David Dauajare, Appellee

Date of Judgment/Appealable Order : April 07, 2015 Nature of Action: Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt Disposition of Case: Dismissed by Plaintiff/Non-Suit/Final Jury Trial: No Plaintiff’s Motion to Modify, Correct, or Refo rm Or for New Trial Filed on: May 7, 2015 Notice of Appeal Filed On: July 06, 2015

Signed, on this the 8 th day of July, 2015

.


### ANNIE REBECCA ELLIOTT FORT BEND COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK 301 JACKSON, RICHMOND, TEXAS 77469

By: /s/ Petra Lozano Deputy District Clerk Petra Lozano Telephone: (281) 341-4502

Electronically Filed with the First Court of Appeals

cc: Daniel W. Jackson, Attorney at Law Jennette E Deponte, Attorney at Law Karen Rothman, Court Reporter
856 A.2d 42

#### OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. Michael D. BART, Respondent.

No. 941 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

July 29, 2004.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of July, 2004, there having been filed with this Court by Michael D. Bart his verified Statement of Resignation dated May 6, 2004, stating that he desires to *403resign from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in accordance with the provisions of Rule 215, Pa.R.D.E., it is

ORDERED that the resignation of Michael D. Bart be and it is hereby accepted and he is DISBARRED ON CONSENT from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and it is further ORDERED that he shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. Respondent shall pay costs, if any, to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E.
585 A.2d 375

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. WALTER BUT.

September 18, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.