alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CRP/Capstone 14W Property Owner, LLC, Respondent, v Behman Hambleton *LLP,*Appellant, et al., Defendant.

[973 NYS2d 920]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna M. Mills, J.), entered on or about May 2, 2012, which denied defendant Behman Hambleton LLP’s (Behman) motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Because the complaint clearly alleged that Behman was in privity of estate with the leased premises *(Howard Stores Corp. v Robison Rayon Co.,*64 Misc 2d 913, 915 [App Term, 1st Dept 1970], *affd*36 AD2d 911 [1st Dept 1971]) and because the complaint, read generously, alleged that the entire business of the signatory to the lease, defendant Gibson & Behman P.C., was now carried on by Behman, the IAS court correctly held that the motion to dismiss should be denied *(cf. Wells v Ronning,*269 AD2d 690, 692-693 [3d Dept 2000]). Concur — Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VICTOR MANUEL CABRERA ROSAS;

MARIA ESTHER CABRERA,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-73014

Agency Nos. A095-295-030

Agency Nos. A095-295-031

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 12, 2014** 

Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Victor Manuel Cabrera Rosas and Maria Esther Cabrera, natives and citizens

of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their

FILED

JUN 16 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
applications for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252. We review de novo constitutional claims and questions of law. 

Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005). We dismiss in

part and deny in part the petition for review. 

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that

petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to their

qualifying relatives. See id.

Petitioners’ contention that the agency violated due process by disregarding

the evaluations regarding their children’s language abilities is not supported by the

record and does not amount to a colorable constitutional claim that would invoke

our jurisdiction. See id. (traditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged

due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims). 

Petitioners’ contention that the BIA violated due process by reviewing de

novo the IJ’s 2004 decision is unavailing. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii) (granting

BIA authority to review de novo questions of law, discretion, and judgment).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

2 11-73014
Exhibit 31.1


RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION


OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER




I, Albert F. Buzzetti, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:





1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Bancorp of New Jersey, Inc.;





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 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 report;





3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;





4.    The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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 consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;












(d)           disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the 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 financial reporting 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 control over financial reporting.


Date:  March 31, 2010
/s/ Albert F. BuzzettiAlbert F. BuzzettiChairman and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 10, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, May 10, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A16I0189. TRACY TOWNS v. HAVENBROOK HOMES, LLC et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

15C06216
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 AFP Imaging Corporation
(the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, (the "Report"), I David
Vozick, Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 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 results of operations
          of the Company.



/s/ David Vozick
------------------------------
David Vozick,
Chairman of the Board
Co-Principal Executive Officer
May 13, 2005


                                       19
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 433 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 433

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and implement 
 standards for the operation of non-scheduled, commercial air carrier 
    (air charter) and general aviation operations at Ronald Reagan 
                      Washington National Airport.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 17, 2005

   Mr. Allen introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and implement 
 standards for the operation of non-scheduled, commercial air carrier 
    (air charter) and general aviation operations at Ronald Reagan 
                      Washington National Airport.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Reopen Reagan National to General 
Aviation Act''.

SEC. 2. AIR CHARTER OPERATIONS AT RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL 
              AIRPORT.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not later than 180 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland 
Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall 
finalize and implement regulations permitting the resumption of non-
scheduled, commercial air carrier (air charter) and general aviation 
operations at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. The 
regulations may provide reasonable requirements to ensure the security 
of operations at the airport. Such requirements may include--
            (1) screening and certification of air charter and general 
        aviation flight and ground crews;
            (2) advance clearance of passenger manifests by the 
        Transportation Security Administration;
            (3) physical screening of passengers and luggage for air 
        charter and general aviation operations;
            (4) physical inspection of aircraft;
            (5) compliance with established special flight procedures; 
        and
            (6) limiting the airports from which flights into Ronald 
        Reagan Washington National Airport can originate.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 92 (Thursday, May 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 22764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11288]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11726 and <greek-i>11727]


Arkansas Disaster Number AR-00029

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1834-DR), dated 04/27/
2009.

    Incident: Severe Storms and Tornadoes.
    Incident Period: 04/09/2009.

DATES: Effective Date: 05/07/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/26/2009.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 01/27/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster 
declaration for the State of Arkansas, dated 04/27/2009 is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties: (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Ashley
Contiguous Counties/Parishes: (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Arkansas: Bradley, Chicot, Drew, Union
    Louisiana: Morehouse, Union

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-11288 Filed 5-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### Pettis *v.*Brewster.

1. Where a tenant is proceeded against as holding over, and he files a counter-affidavit denying the tenancy, he may be charged with double rent for the time he held over, up to the date of the trial, although nothing is said of rent in the plaintiff’s affidavit to obtain the warrant. The statute annexes this incident to a wrongful holding over.

*528■2. Although when double rent is allowed no interest can be computed, yet a charge to the contrary will not justify a new trial where it is manifest from the evidence and the verdict that no interest was allowed by the jury.

S. The jury having allowed the full value of the improvements actually made, any error in the charge of the court on that subject was immaterial. There was no error in denying a new trial.

April 23, 1894.

Argued at the last term.

*Judgment affirmed..*

Dispossessory warrant. Before Judge Smith. Twiggs •superior court. April term, 1893.

The affidavit .for the warrant alleged, that Brewster was the owner of the land described, which he rented to Pettis for 1889, that Brewster desired possession, which had been demanded after the expiration of the term of renting, and that Pettis refused to deliver the same. By counter-affidavit- Pettis denied that he held the land, by lease or rent or at will or sufferance from Brewster or any one holding under him. By amendment he alleged, that he went into possession under contract of purchase; that the land was useful only for farming, and it was necessary to expend much money for repairs to houses and fences, clearing land, etc., which improvements he made by direction of Brewster’s agent who assured him he would not lose the same; and he asked to recoup their value against the claim for rent. 'The jury found for the plaintiff" $371 rent, and the premises. Defendant’s motion for anew trial was overruled. The motion alleged, in addition to the general grounds, that the court erred in admittin g testimony of Pettis that the land was worth about $240 a year for rent, over objection of his counsel that the affidavit on which the warrant was based did not allege any amount which the land was worth for rent; that the court erred in charging the jury that plaintiff would be entitled to recover interest on whatever amount was found to be ■double the amount the land was worth for rent; and further erred in charging that before defendant could *529.set off the value of improvements against the demand for rent, the parties must have agreed as to the kind of improvements to be made and the amount to be expended therefor, except such improvements as were necessary to protect crops.

L. D. Moore, for plaintiff’ in error

W. E. Simmons and A. C. Pate, *contra.*
Exhibit 32.3



                            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 AFP Imaging Corporation
(the "Company") for the quarter ended December 31, 2004, (the "Report"), I Elise
Nissen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
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 results of operations
          of the Company.




/s/ Elise Nissen
-----------------------
Elise Nissen,
Chief Financial Officer
February 11, 2005
##### 



SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20549
 FORM 6-K REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the month of June 2004 Fairmont Hotels & Resorts Inc. (Translation of Registrants Name Into English)
 Canadian Pacific Tower,
Ste 1600, 100 Wellington Street W., Toronto, Ontario M5K 1B7, Canada (Address of Principal Executive Offices)
 (Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual
reports under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F.) Form 20-F     o
    
    Form 40-F     þ
 (Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the
information contained in this form is also thereby furnishing the information
to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934.) Yes     o
    
    No     þ
 (If Yes is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the
registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82- . This report furnished on Form 6-K shall be incorporated by reference into
each of the Registration Statements under the Securities Act of 1933 of the
registrant:
Form S-8 No. 333-13960.    Page 1 of 2 Pages
Exhibits Index appears on Page 3




---



##### 



SIGNATURES Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. FAIRMONT HOTELS & RESORTS INC.
(Registrant)Date: June 7, 2004
    By:
    /s/ Sari L. DiamondName:
    Sari L. DiamondTitle:
    Assistant Corporate Secretary




---



##### 



Exhibits Index The following is a list of Exhibits included as part of this Report on Form
6-K. Exhibit No.
    
    Description of Exhibits99.1
    
    Fairmont Hotels & Resorts Inc. To Realize $110 Million Gain On Sale
Of The Fairmont Kea Lani Maui
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5
<LEGEND>

This schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted from SHELTER
PROPERTIES  II 2000 Second  Quarter  10-QSB and is  qualified in its entirety by
reference to such 10-QSB filing.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                               0000319723
<NAME>                              SHELTER PROPERTIES II
<MULTIPLIER>                                           1,000


<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                      APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                   483
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            177
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           0 <F1>
<PP&E>                                                27,083
<DEPRECIATION>                                        18,442
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        10,354
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      0 <F1>
<BONDS>                                                7,985
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                             1,682
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          10,354
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       3,163
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       2,529
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       352
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            0
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                             634
<EPS-BASIC>                                            22.84 <F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0
<FN>

<F1> Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet. <F2> Multiplier is 1.

</FN>


</TABLE>
##### 



FORM 6-K
 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 Report of Foreign Private Issuer
 Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
   BROOKFIELD PROPERTIES CORPORATION
  BCE Place
181 Bay Street
Suite 330
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5J 2T3
(416) 369-2300
  o x
    o x




---



##### 



DOCUMENTS FILED AS PART OF THIS FORM 6-K
  SIGNATURES
  Date: April 11, 2006.Brookfield Properties CorporationBy:
    
    /s/ Craig J. LaurieName:
    
    Craig J. LaurieTitle:
    
    Senior Vice President & Chief
Financial Officer




---



##### 



EXHIBIT LIST
 Exhibit
    
    Description99.1
    
    Brookfield Properties Corporation Press Release dated April 11, 2006
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4034 

To amend title 18 of the United States Code to prohibit certain types 

of vote tampering. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 

Mr. REID (for himself and Mrs. CLINTON) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18 of the United States Code to prohibit 

certain types of vote tampering. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Voter Suppression, 

5 Ballot Hacking, and Election Fraud Prevention Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON VOTE TAMPERING. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United 

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•S 4034 IS

1 ‘‘§ 612. Vote tampering 

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Whoever knowingly and willfully 

3 interferes with, affects, attempts to interfere with, or at4 tempts to affect an election of a candidate or a ballot ini5 tiative by tampering with a voting system, discarding bal6 lots, or altering a vote shall be fined under this title or 

7 imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. 

8 ‘‘(b) APPLICATION.—This section applies only to elec9 tions described in, and candidates described in, section 

10 11(e)(2) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 

11 1973i(e)(2)). 

12 ‘‘(c) CIVIL ACTION.—Any individual whose right to 

13 vote is interfered with by reason of a violation of this sec14 tion may bring a civil action in Federal court against the 

15 violator and recover damages not to exceed $10,000. 

16 ‘‘(d) DEFINITION.—In this section, the terms ‘vote’ 

17 and ‘voting’ have the meanings given the terms in section 

18 14(c) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 

19 1973l(c)).’’. 

20 (b) CHAPTER ANALYSIS.—The chapter analysis for 

21 chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code, is amended 

22 by inserting after the item for section 612 the following: 

‘‘612. Vote tampering.’’. 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS