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

<ARTICLE>                  5

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                         JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                               175,956
<SECURITIES>                                         2,602,963
<RECEIVABLES>                                        000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         000
<INVENTORY>                                          000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     000
<PP&E>                                               000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       25,105,203<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                000
<BONDS>                                              000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                000
<PREFERRED>                                          000
<COMMON>                                             000
<OTHER-SE>                                           24,937,790
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         25,105,203<F2>
<SALES>                                              000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     51,485<F3>
<CGS>                                                000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     145,194<F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      000
<CHANGES>                                            000
<NET-INCOME>                                         (612,050)<F5>
<EPS-BASIC>                                        (11.90)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        000
<FN>
<F1>Included  in Total  Assets:  Investments  in Local Limited  Partnerships  of
$22,010,075,   Restricted   cash  of  $284,311   and  Other  assets  of  $31,898
<F2>Included in Total Liabilities and Equity:  Accounts payable to affiliates of
$131,348 and Accounts  payable and accrued  expenses of $36,065  <F3>Included in
Total revenue:  Investment of $40,359 and Other of $11,126 <F4>Included in Other
Expenses:  Asset  management  fees of  $75,499,  General and  administrative  of
$61,649 and Amortization of $8,046 <F5>Included in Net Loss: Equity in losses of
Local  Limited  Partnerships  of $518,341  </FN>
</TABLE>
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

May 20, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. 

ZITA L WEINSHIENK; ROBERT

BLACKBURN; LEWIS T. BABCOCK;

GREGORY C. LANGHAM; RON

WILEY; JACK FOX; JERRY JONES;

DIANNA J. KRIST; MICHELLE BOND;

MARK COLLINS; TINA SUDLOW; D.

FOSTER; WENDY HEIM; RICK

MARTINEZ; C/O ROY; DOES 1-9

(Mailroom, USP-ADX); C/O GEORGE;

TERESA MONTOYA,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-1020

(D.C. No. 1:10-CV-00067-WYD)

ORDER

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. R.

42.1 and 3.3(B)

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1020 Document: 01018426257 Date Filed: 05/20/2010 Page: 1
No. 14,024.

#### De Armond *v.*Ballou.

Fraudulent Conveyance.— *Action to Set Aside.*— Statute *of*Limitations.— *Plea of.*— Demurrer.—Effect.—Where an answer to an action to set aside a fraudulent conveyance avers that the cause of action did not accrue within six years, the plaintiff on demurring to the answer can not receive aid from his complaint, and it will not be looked to to ascertain when the cause of action accrued.

*Same.*— Limitation *of Action.*— Pleading.—A plea of the six years’ statute of limitations to a complaint to set aside a fraudulent conveyance is good.

From the Decatur Circuit Court.

*J. 8. Bcobey,*for appellant.

*J. K. Ewing*and *C. Ewing, Jr.,*for appellee.

Elliott, J.

The appellant’s complaint charges that the appellee is the grantee of a fraudulent conveyance, and seeks to have the conveyance adjudged void and the land subjected to the payment of a claim held by the appellant against the grantor. The appellee answered the six years’ statute of limitations, and the question for decision is as to the sufficiency of this answer.

The demurrer admits the facts pleaded in the answer and we can not look beyond these admitted facts to the averments of the complaint to ascertain when the cause of action accrued. Where an answer avers that the cause of action did not accrue within six years, the plaintiff can not receive aid from his complaint, for the demurrer admits that the averments of the answer are true.

Our decisions settle the question adversety to the contention of the appellant, for they uniformly hold that a plea of the six years’ statute to a complaint to set aside a fraudulent conveyance is good. *Musselman*v. *Kent,*33 Ind. 452; *Duncan*v. *Cravens,*55 Ind. 525; *Sidener*v. *Galbraith,*63 Ind. 89; *Baugh*v. *Boles,*66 Ind. 376; *Wilhite*v. *Hamrick,*92 *399Ind. 594 (599). We can not depart from what was said in *Baugh*v. *Boles, supra,*to be the settled rule.

Filed Feb. 25, 1890;

petition for a rehearing overruled March 1, 1890.

Judgment affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32-1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of WNC CALIFORNIA HOUSING TAX CREDITS III, L.P. (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.








/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.


Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.


President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.





Date: November 10, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 67348]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27616]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS


Notice of Meeting

    The next meeting of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled 
for 18 November 2010, at 10 a.m. in the Commission offices at the 
National Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 401 F Street, 
NW., Washington DC, 20001-2728. Items of discussion may include 
buildings, parks and memorials.
    Draft agendas and additional information regarding the Commission 
are available on our Web site: http://www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding 
the agenda and requests to submit written or oral statements should be 
addressed to Thomas Luebke, Secretary, U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, at 
the above address; by e-mailing <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b1c2c5d0d7d7f1d2d7d09fd6dec7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="87f4f3e6e1e1c7e4e1e6a9e0e8f1">[email protected]</span></a>; or by calling 202-504-
2200. Individuals requiring sign language interpretation for the 
hearing impaired should contact the Secretary at least 10 days before 
the meeting date.

    Dated: October 27, 2010 in Washington DC.
Thomas Luebke,
AIA Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-27616 Filed 11-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6330-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 12, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ARTURO PEREZ-MORALES, 

 Petitioner,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., United States

Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-9563

ORDER

Petitioner’s motion to dismiss this matter is granted. 10th Cir. R. 27.3(A)(9).

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of the court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 09-9563 Document: 01018366576 Date Filed: 02/12/2010 Page: 1
#### LOUISE AUGER v. THE GIONTI AGENCY AND THE HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY.

November 17, 1987.

Cross-petition for certification denied. (See 218 *N.J.Super.*360)
#### Grant and Others *v.*Whiteman.

*Friday, January*18, 1839.

Debt against three persons on a bond declared on as joint. The bond, shown on *oyer,*was joint and several. *Held,*that there was no variance.

APPEAL from the *Morgan*Circuit Court.

Blackford, J.

This was an action of debt against *William Grant, David G. Stotts,*and *Charles B. Butler,*upon a delivery bond. The declaration states that the defendants, by their writing obligatory, sealed with their seals and to the Court shown, &c. acknowledged themselves to be held and firmly bound unto the plaintiff in the sum of, &c. The bond appeared, on *oyer,*to be joint and several; and the defendants demurred to the declaration. Judgment for the plaintiff.

It is contended that there is a variance between the bond described in the declaration, and that produced on *oyer;*the bond described being joint, and the one shown on *oyer*being joint and several. We think, however, that the declaration is sufficient. The bond is declared on as joint, and the bond produced is joint. The declaration goes as far as was necessary, in order to show the joint liability of the defendants; and that'was all that could be required in this case. The circumstance that the bond was several as well as joint, could have no effect upon the suit.' If several per*68sons make a joint and several promissory note, the holder sue one of the makers alone, and declare in the same form as if no other but the defendant had executed the note. *Mountstephen*v. Brooke, 1 Barn. & Ald. 224. And it follows, in accordance with the principle of that case, that when the suit is against all the obligors of a joint and several bond, the form of the declaration may be the same as if the bond were only joint. The averment in the declaration before us, that the defendants had executed a joint bond, is sus; tained by the bond produced on *oyer.*The averment might have been more particular, and shown the bond to be several as well as joint, but that was not necessary.

*W. Quarles,*for the appellants.

*B. Bull,*for the appellee.

There is another objection made to the declaration, but it is obviously unfounded.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is affirmed, with 5 *per cent.*damages and costs.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, David B. Cook, certify that:

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

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

            (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
      material information relating to the registrant, including its
      consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
      being prepared;

            (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
      controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing
      date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

            (c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
      evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of
      internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
      record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified
      for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal
      controls; and

            (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
      other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
      controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date August 11, 2003


By /s/ David B. Cook
   -----------------------
   Chief Executive Officer


                                       16
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Center for Inherited Disease Research Access Committee.                    

*Date:*                         November 17, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         12:30 p.m. to 1 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 4069, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call)                    

*Contact Person:*                         Ken D. Nakamura, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 4076, MSC 9306, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-402-0838.                    

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 26, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-27562 Filed 11-1-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

March 15, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LARRY EUGENE HODGE, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 09-6276

(D.C. No. 5:05-CR-00160-R-2)

ORDER

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. R.

42.1.

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 09-6276 Document: 01018383881 Date Filed: 03/15/2010 Page: 1
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, David J. Mickelson, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Redhook Ale Brewery, Incorporated;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions); (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 10, 2007         BY: /s/ David J. Mickelson            David J. Mickelson                *President*                *and Chief Operating Officer*  
37
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Darren T. Mollo, D.C., as Assignee of Barnes, Omari, Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>21st Century Insurance Company, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant.Law Offices of Bryan M. Rothenberg (Konstantinos Tsirkas of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Theresa M. Ciccotto, J.), entered February 2, 2017. The order denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. </p><p>Plaintiff correctly contends that certain letters from defendant were delay letters which failed to toll defendant's time to pay or deny the claims. However, defendant's motion also included copies of the examination under oath (EUO) scheduling letters which were timely mailed by the law firm retained by defendant to conduct the EUOs, and plaintiff has raised no issue with respect to the sufficiency of those letters (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a> [2008]; <a href="../2014/2014_51814.htm" target="_blank"><i>Great Health Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Nationwide Ins.</i>, 46 Misc 3d 130</a>[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 51812[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2014]). Additionally, contrary to plaintiff's argument, the affidavits submitted by defendant sufficiently established the timely mailing of the denial of claim forms (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a>).</p><p>Accordingly, the order is affirmed.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., WESTON and ALIOTTA, JJ., concur. </p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: July 19, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
August 14, 2014



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CLAY EXPLORATION, IN C. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 00042

- CV V.

SANTA ROSA OPERATING , LLC , Appellee

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the order in favor of appellee, Sa nta Rosa Operating, LLC, signed June 25, 2012 and made final on December 12, 2012 was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order ap pellant, Clay Exploration, Inc. to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further ord er this decision certified below for observance.