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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          54,566
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,942
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,123
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                80,294
<PP&E>                                          16,301
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,628
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 161,944
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,129
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            20
<OTHER-SE>                                      63,801
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   161,944
<SALES>                                         21,768
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,768
<CGS>                                            5,705
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,993
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,982
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,123)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,123)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,123)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.62)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.62)


</TABLE>
2010-0187.

#### State ex rel. Keating v. Skeldon.

Lucas App. No. L-08-1414, 2009-Ohio-6971.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.1

                                PROMISSORY NOTE


                                                             September 29, 1998
$11,406,250 U.S. Dollars                              San Francisco, California


California Federal Bank, A Federal Savings Bank ("Lender"), and California
Federal Preferred Capital Corporation ("Borrower") hereby agree to the
following terms and conditions:

1.   Lender hereby agrees to lend to Borrower an amount equal to Eleven Million
     Four Hundred Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($11,406,250).

2.   The term of this Promissory Note shall be one (1) year from the date
     hereof.

3.   Interest shall be computed at an interest rate of five percent (5%) per
     annum, compounded annually.

4.   Borrower promises to repay to Lender the amount borrowed by Borrower under
     this Promissory Note, and to pay interest on such amount from the date
     such funds are received by Borrower until the date that Borrower repays
     the funds, with interest calculations to exclude the date of repayment.
     The outstanding amount is due and payable upon expiration of the term of
     this Promissory Note.

5.   At the option of Borrower, all borrowing hereunder may be repaid in whole
     or in part at any time without penalty.



                               LENDER
                               CALIFORNIA FEDERAL BANK, A FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK



                               By:      /s/ Laurence Reed
                                   -------------------------------

                               BORROWER
                               CALIFORNIA FEDERAL PREFERRED CAPITAL CORPORATION



                               By:      /s/ Richard H. Terzian
                                   -------------------------------
#### In the Matter of Edward R. Frost, Jr., Appellant, v Scott Wisniewski, Respondent.

[6 NYS3d 809]

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oswego County (Kimberly M. Seager, J.), entered September 19, 2013. The order dismissed the cross petition.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the cross petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Oswego County, for a hearing in accordance with the following memorandum: Petitioner appeals from an order dismissing his *1306cross petition seeking a determination that he is the biological father of the subject child. Respondent signed an acknowledgment of paternity with respect to the child when the child was born in 2000. DNA testing, however, later established that petitioner was in fact the child’s biological father. In 2011, petitioner filed a custody petition and, by default order, Family Court, inter alia, awarded petitioner custody of the child. Respondent subsequently filed a petition pursuant to Family Court Act article 6 seeking a modification of that order to permit visitation of the child with respondent and the half brother of the child, and petitioner filed a cross petition seeking an order vacating respondent’s acknowledgment of paternity, determining that petitioner is the child’s biological father, and directing that an amended birth certificate be filed *(see generally*Family Ct Act § 516-a). The court dismissed the cross petition with prejudice on the ground of res judicata. The record before us does not indicate the court’s disposition of the petition.

Petitioner contends that the best interests of the child, “the need for finality, stability, and consistency in family determinations,” and respondent’s nonopposition to the cross petition militate against the result reached by the court. We agree and conclude that the court erred in applying the doctrine of res judicata to petitioner’s claims in the cross petition *(see Matter of Cleophous P. v Latrice M.R.,*299 AD2d 936, 936 [2002]). In matters concerning filiation, “ ‘it is the child’s best interests which are of paramount concern’ ” *(Matter of Darcie T. v Robert M.L.,*255 AD2d 955, 955 [1998]; *see generally Matter of Martin G.D. v Lucille A.F.,*35 AD3d 1280, 1281 [2006]). Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that it is in the child’s best interests to permit petitioner to be heard on his claims in the cross petition. We note that petitioner has been the child’s legal, full-time caregiver and provider since October 2011, and that respondent also recognizes petitioner as the child’s biological father *(see generally Matter of Westchester County Dept. of Social Servs. v Robert W.R.,*25 AD3d 62, 71 [2005]; *Cleophous P.,*299 AD2d at 936). We therefore reverse the order, reinstate the cross petition, and remit the matter to Family Court for a hearing on the cross petition before a different judge *(see Matter of James T.H. v Danielle M. K-R.,*48 AD3d 683, 683-684 [2008]).

Present — Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Lindley, Sconiers and DeJoseph, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 5**

 

**[LETTERHEAD OF MATTHEW LEPORE]**

 

October 15, 2009

Pfizer Inc.  235 East 42nd Street   New York, New York 10017-5755 

Pfizer Inc.:

In connection with the  Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to 1,779,887 shares of Common Stock  of Pfizer Inc. under the Wyeth Savings Plan (the "Plan"), it is my opinion  that:

All necessary corporate  proceedings have been taken to authorize the issuance of the shares under the  Plan, and all such shares, upon issuance in accordance with the Plan and upon  full payment in cash for such shares issued, will be validly issued and  outstanding and fully paid and non-assessable.

In preparing this opinion, I have  examined certificates of public officials, certificates of officers and copies  certified to my satisfaction of such corporate documents and records of the  Company and such other papers as I have thought relevant and necessary as a  basis for my opinion. I have relied on such certificates in connection with the  accuracy of actual matters contained in such documents that were not  independently established.

I consent to the use of this  opinion in the Registration Statement. In giving such consent, I do not admit  that I come within the category of persons whose consent is required under  Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933, or the Rules and Regulations of the  Securities and Exchange Commission.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Matthew Lepore

MATTHEW LEPORE
#### Isaac Lara CASTILLO; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-72040.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 20, 2007.*

Filed Feb. 26, 2007.

Isaac Lara Castillo, Margarita Martinez Aquilar, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Jennifer Paisner, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Isaac Lara Castillo and Margarita Martinez Aquilar, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of *623their application for cancellation of removal. Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Lara Castillo and Martinez Aquilar’s challenge to the agency’s discretionary determination that they failed to demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to their qualifying relatives. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); *Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 929-30 (9th Cir. 2005). Moreover, Lara Castillo and Martinez Aquilar have failed to raise a color-able constitutional or legal claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. *See Torres-Aguilar v. INS,*246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         92,488
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          4,495
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               29,806
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   574,925
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                              0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                0
<LOANS>                                     1,356,203
<ALLOWANCE>                                    14,459
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              2,205,521
<DEPOSITS>                                  1,716,303
<SHORT-TERM>                                  310,429
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            19,346
<LONG-TERM>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       23,434
<OTHER-SE>                                    125,142
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              2,194,654
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                27,477
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               9,775
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                  360
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               37,612
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             12,234
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             15,612
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          22,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   1,500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 93
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                14,288
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 6,305
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 6,305
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    6,305
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.26
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   4.48
<LOANS-NON>                                       999
<LOANS-PAST>                                      689
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0 
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                15,800
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               13,281
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                     361
<RECOVERIES>                                       39
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              14,459
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           14,459
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             0  
                                                    

</TABLE>
#### John Paul TURNER, a/k/a Pops, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. George BUSH, U.S. President and Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces; Tim Kaine, Virginia Governor and Commander of the Virginia Army National Guard; John Roberts, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 06-2007.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 2, 2007.

Decided: Feb. 28, 2007.

John Paul Turner, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

*193Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Paul Turner appeals the district court’s order dismissing this action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. *Turner v. Bush,*No. 7:06-cv-00526-sgw (W.D.Va. Aug. 81, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 13042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5123]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Vermont Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that a meeting of 
the Vermont Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 11:00 
a.m. and adjourn at 3:00 p.m. on April 2, 2001, at the Conference Room 
One, Burlington International Airport, Airport Drive, South Burlington, 
Vermont 05403. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss future 
coordination with educational leaders, and plan future activities.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern 
Regional Office, 202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired 
persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign 
language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten 
(10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, February 26, 2001.
Edward A. Hailes, Jr.,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-5123 Filed 3-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
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 of American Tax Credit Properties L.P.
(the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 29, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David Salzman, Chief Executive Officer of Richman Tax Credit Properties Inc.,
general partner of Richman Tax Credit Properties L.P., general partner of the
Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S)
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 Registrant.



/s/ David Salzman
-------------------------------------------
David Salzman
Chief Executive Officer of Richman Tax
Credit Properties Inc., general partner of
Richman Tax Credit Properties L.P., general
partner of the Registrant
August 13, 2004
#### Irwin, survivor, *v.*Williams.

Submitted March 2,

Decided March 28, 1901.

Practice in the Supreme Court.

*O. I). Phillips, P. Paw,*and *J. Z. Foster,*for plaintiff.

*J. J. Northcutt,*for defendant.

Little, J.

No brief for plaintiff in error was filed in this court on or before February 25, 1901, in accordance with the order of this court, and no reason shown for such default. Under the ruling in case of *Irwin*v. *A., K. & N. By. Co.,*the writ of error is *Dismissed.*

*All the Justices concurring.*
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.36

                               ADDENDUM TO LEASE

This is an ADDENDUM to that certain Lease dated May 16, 1997, ("Lease") by and
between CSM PROPERTIES, INC., a Minnesota corporation, ("Landlord") and
FIELDWORKS, INC., a Minnesota corporation, ("Tenant"), and is entered into
effective this 30th day of December, 1997.

In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, and other good and
valuable consideration, Landlord and Tenant hereby confirm and/or agree as
follows:

1. SECTION 1.2 PREMISES. Landlord and Tenant acknowledge and confirm that the
rentable area of the Premises is 52,769 square feet.

2. SECTION 1.4 BASE RENT. The BAse rent for the Lease Term shall be:

Lease               Monthly       Annual        Per
Months              Base Rent     Base Rent     Sq. Ft.
------              ---------     ---------     -------
Initial Term
11/20/97-12/28/97   $22,766.45    $273,197.40   $8.70 (based on 31,402sf office)

12/29/97-11/30/01   $38,257.53    $459,090.30   $8.70 (based on 52,769sf 
                                                       ofice/warehouse/
                                                       manufacturing)
12/1/01-11/30/04    $40,192.39    $482,308.66   $9.14 

Option Term
12/1/04-1/30/07     market         market       market

12/1/07-11/30/10    market         market       market

3. SECTION 1.7 PRO RATE SHARE. Landlord and Tenant acknowledge and confirm that
Tenant's pro rata share of operating expenses shall be sixty two and thirteen
one hundredths per cent (62.13%).

4. MISCELLANEOUS. If any provision of the Lease is inconsistent with the
provisions contained herein, then and in such event the provisions of this
Addendum shall control. Except as expressly modified herein, all other terms and
conditions of the Lease shall remain unchanged, and in full force and effect.

LANDLORD:                               TENANT:
---------                               -------
CSM PROPERTIES, INC.                    FIELDWORKS, INC.
BY:  /s/ David Carland                  BY:  /s/ Karen L. Engebretson
ITS: Vice President                     ITS: CFO/VP FINANCE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      13,024,555
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,051,132
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            43,218,084
<PP&E>                                      42,012,691
<DEPRECIATION>                                  21,308
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             452,665,659
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,490,052
<BONDS>                                    229,955,145
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,467,600
<OTHER-SE>                                 139,430,384
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               452,665,659
<SALES>                                     14,107,360
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,149,894
<CGS>                                        1,042,534
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,356,214
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               100,562
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,664,051
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,826,649)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    46,345
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,872,954)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                598,225
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,471,179
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>