alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Maria C. May, Appellant, v Robert D. May, Respondent.

[666 NYS2d 20]

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), dated October 31, 1996, which rejected her objections to a proposed judgment of divorce, and (2), as limited by her brief, from stated portions of a judgment of the same court, also dated October 31, 1996.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed, as no appeal lies as of right from an order which does not determine a motion made on notice *{see,*CPLR 5701 [a] [2], [3]); and it is further,

Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

The portions of the judgment from which the plaintiff appeals are based upon a comprehensive stipulation of settlement entered into by the parties. Consequently, those portions of the judgment are not appealable since the plaintiff consented to the terms of the stipulation and is not an aggrieved party *{see,*CPLR 5511; *Tongue v Tongue,*61 NY2d 809; *Matter of Starz v Tissiera,*206 AD2d 432; *Strauss v Strauss,*140 AD2d 330). Thompson, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.
Rome Bancorp, Inc

Form 10-QSB

For the quarter ended March 31, 2004



EXHIBIT 32.1



Statement furnished pursuant to Section 906 of the 
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned, Charles M. Sprock, is the Chief Executive Officer of Rome Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company").

This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report").

By execution of this statement, I certify that:

1. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods covered by the Report.
3. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
4. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods covered by the Report.

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.  It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





May 5, 2004						/s/David C. Nolan 
Dated							David C. Nolan
#### Sadiqa S. Codrington, Appellant, v Citimortgage, Inc., Respondent.

[988 NYS2d 636]

In an action, inter alia, for injunctive relief, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feinman, J.), entered April 17, 2012, which denied her motion by order to show cause to preliminarily enjoin the defendant from *844holding a foreclosure sale and liquidation of the plaintiffs security interest in certain shares of stock and a proprietary lease for a certain apartment during the pendency of the action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

“The method of service provided for in an order to show cause is jurisdictional in nature and must be strictly complied with” *(Matter of El Greco Socy. of Visual Arts, Inc. v Diamantidis,*47 AD3d 929, 929 [2008]). The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that jurisdiction over the defendant was obtained *(see Frankel v Schilling,*149 AD2d 657, 659 [1989]). Here, the plaintiff failed to submit an affidavit of a process server attesting to service of the subject motion on the defendant pursuant to CPLR 311, as required by the order to show cause. Thus, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the plaintiff failed to serve the defendant in the manner directed by the court *(see Matter of Rotanelli v Board of Elections of Westchester County,*109 AD3d 562, 563 [2013]; *U.S. Bank N.A. v Feliciano,*103 AD3d 791 [2013]; *Crown Waterproofing, Inc. v Tadco Constr. Corp.,*99 AD3d 964, 965 [2012]; *Lobo v Soto,*73 AD3d 1135, 1135-1136 [2010]). Accordingly, the plaintiffs motion was properly denied on this ground alone.

In light of our determination, we need not reach the plaintiffs remaining contentions.

Rivera, J.P., Balkin, Chambers and Miller, JJ., concur.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04 - 12 - 00666 - CR Reynaldo Roberto ESPARZA a/k/a “El Peine,” Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 341st Judicial District Court , Webb County, Texas Trial Court No. 2005 - CRN - 166 - D3 Honorable Elma T. Salinas Ender , Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 5, 2012 DIS MISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On October 12, 2012, appellant filed a notice of appeal in trial court cause number 2005CRN000166 - D3. This court, however, previously affirmed appellant’s conviction in that trial court cause number. See Esparza v. State , No. 04 - 08 - 00039 - CR, 2009 WL 89697 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio Jan. 14, 2009, no pet.). Although the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted appellant’s post - conviction application for writ of habeas corpus, the relief granted on ly permitted appellant to file an out - of - time petition for discretionary review of this court’s judgment in our cause number 04 - 08 - 00039 - CR. See Ex parte Esparza , No. AP - 76839, 201204 - 12 - 00666 - CR

- 2 - WL 3996425 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 12, 2012). The Court did not grant app ellant permission to file a new appeal. See id . On October 24, 2012, this court ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. On November 21, 2012, a ppellant’s attorney filed a letter stating appellant does not intend to file a response to this court’s order. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 7170

LEROY WILLIAMSON , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. JUSTIN ANDREWS , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:16

- hc

- 02242

- FL )

Submitted : February 28, 2019 Decided: March 12, 2019

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Leroy Williamson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Leroy Williamson, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by t he district court.
Williamson v. Andrews , No. 5:16

- hc

- 02242

- FL (E.D.N.C. Aug. 28, 2018). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the dec isional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM
10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 OF BUILDING MATERIALS CORPORATION OF
AMERICA AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>        927314
<NAME>       BUILDING MATERIALS CORPORATION OF AMERICA
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                             24,987
<SECURITIES>                      157,953
<RECEIVABLES>                      24,249
<ALLOWANCES>                        4,035
<INVENTORY>                        93,364
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  382,163
<PP&E>                            314,400
<DEPRECIATION>                     63,799
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    847,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             161,448
<BONDS>                           588,413
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                1
<OTHER-SE>                         44,872
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      847,493
<SALES>                         1,087,957
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,087,957
<CGS>                             776,908
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     776,908
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 49,674
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    12,180
<INCOME-TAX>                        4,628
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 7,552
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   (18,113)
<CHANGES>                               0 
<NET-INCOME>                      (10,561)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0
        


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Clifford Johnson, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 160]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), rendered January 4, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the matter remanded for a new trial.

As it is conceded by the People that *Rosario*material in the form of the original Request for Laboratory Analysis form was never disclosed to defendant, defendant’s conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered *(People v Rosario,*9 NY2d 286, *cert denied*368 US 866; *People v Jones,*70 NY2d 547; *People v Ranghelle,*69 NY2d 56; CPL 240.45 [1] [a]). A photocopy of the form that was provided to the defense did not include certain alterations testified to by a police witness, and therefore cannot be considered a duplicative equivalent of the original *(see, People v Joseph,*86 NY2d 565, 569; *People v Young,*79 NY2d 365, 370; *People v Wallace,*76 NY2d 953, 955). Defense counsel’s election not to cross-examine the witness further without the original does not excuse this disclosure violation *(People v Goins,*73 NY2d 989, 991). Additionally, since the prosecution did not even attempt to establish that the original document was lost or destroyed, let alone meet its burden on this issue, no lesser sanction was available *(see, People v Banch,*80 NY2d 610, 620; *People v Morton,*189 AD2d 488, 495). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Williams, Tom and Mazzarelli, Jj.
EXHIBIT 21.1


                                  SUBSIDIARIES


         Innkeepers USA Trust, a Maryland real estate investment trust (the
"Company"), operates principally through two entities, (i) Innkeepers Financial
Corporation, a Virginia corporation ("IFC"), which is a wholly-owned subsidiary
of the Company, and (ii) Innkeepers USA Limited Partnership, a Virginia limited
partnership (the "Partnership"), of which IFC owns an approximately 95.7%
interest. All of the Company's hotels are owned by the Partnership or subsidiary
limited partnerships which are owned 99% by the Partnership and 1% by either the
Company directly or corporations which are wholly-owned by the Company.
##### 



Exhibit 99.5 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 OR 15d-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Donald Tremblay, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Great Lakes Power
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 issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The issuer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)) for the issuer 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
issuer, 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;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuers disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the issuers internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the period
covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuers internal
control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the issuers auditors and the audit committee of the issuers board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):  (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 issuer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 issuers
internal control over financial reporting. Dated: May 19, 2004 /s/ Donald TremblayDonald TremblaySenior Vice-President and Chief
Financial Officer (Principal
Financial Officer)
#### Phillippe Rameau, Respondent, v Jura King, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 513]

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berke, J.), dated March 13, 1997, as denied her motion, in effect, for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action asserted in the complaint based upon the plaintiff's failure to sustain a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and the defendant’s motion is granted.

The evidence submitted by the defendant made out a prima facie case *(see,*CPLR 3212 [b]) that the plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The only medical evidence submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the motion, an affirmed report prepared by the plaintiff’s treating chiropractor, did not constitute competent evidence *(see,*CPLR 2106; *Feintuch v Grella,*209 AD2d 377). Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson, Friedmann and Gold-stein, JJ., concur.
##### 



Exhibit 31.3
 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 I, David A. Simon, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of National Property Analysts Master Limited
Partnership (NPAMLP);
 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(s) 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)) 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;
 (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants 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(s) 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, 2008
 By: EBL&S Property Management Inc., Agent for NPAMLP
 By:
    
    /s/ David A. Simon

Name: David A. SimonTitle: Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1

                         [ERNST & YOUNG LLP LETTERHEAD]


                                                                Exhibit 99.2

                        Report of Independent Accountants


To the Board of Directors of
AutoFinance Group, Inc.

We have examined management's assertion that as of June 30, 1997 the internal
control system over servicing securitized receivables of AFG Receivables, Inc.
by AutoFinance Group, Inc. met the criteria for effective internal control
described in "Internal Control - Integrated Framework," issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Management's assertion
is included in the accompanying Management Report on Internal Control over
Servicing of Securitized Receivables.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
obtaining an understanding of the internal control structure over servicing of
securitized receivables, testing and evaluating the design and operating
effectiveness of the internal control structure over servicing of securitized
receivables, and such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for
our opinion.

Because of the inherent limitations in any system of internal accounting
control, errors or irregularities may occur and not be detected. Also,
projections of evaluations of the internal control structure over servicing of
receivables to future periods are subject to the risk that the internal control
structure may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management's assertion that, as of June 30, 1997, the internal
control system over servicing of securitized receivables of AFG Receivables,
Inc. by AutoFinance Group, Inc. met the criteria for effective internal control
described in "Internal Control - Integrated Framework," issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission is fairly stated, in all
material respects, based upon criteria established in "Internal Control -
Integrated Framework."


                                                        /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

                                                        ERNST & YOUNG LLP

August 1, 1997
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 2.6.1


                      CONSENT TO TERMINATION OF AGREEMENTS


     The undersigned parties to that certain Amended and Restated Asset Purchase
Agreement, dated as of May 19, 1997 ("Purchase Agreement"), do hereby consent to
the termination of the Purchase Agreement and all agreements (between any of the
undersigned parties) that are related to the transactions contemplated in the
Purchase Agreement.


     BUYER:                   CROSS-CONTINENT AUTO RETAILERS, INC.,
                              a Delaware corporation


                              By:           /s/ Robert W. Hall             
                                   ---------------------------------------
                                   Robert W. Hall, Senior Vice Chairman
                              Date:     August 5, 1997




     SELLER:                  JRJ INVESTMENTS, INC.,
                              a Nevada corporation


                              By:           /s/ James J. Chaisson, Sr.     
                                   ---------------------------------------
                                   James J. Chaisson, Sr., President
                              Date:     August 5, 1997




     SHAREHOLDER:             THE CHAISSON FAMILY TRUST R-501


                              By:            /s/ James J. Chaisson, Sr.       
                                   ---------------------------------------
                                   James J. Chaisson, Sr., Trustee
                              Date:     August 5, 1997
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

CHARLES LEVI MORROW,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-16-00040-CR

Appeal from the

394th District Court 

of Brewster County, Texas 

(TC# 4410) 

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.