alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|   | (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/ A. Brian Davis                                                                |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | A. Brian Davis                                                                    |
|   | Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) |

----
### §1908. Experimental stewardship program

#### (a) Scope of program

The Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture are hereby authorized and directed to develop and implement, on an experimental basis on selected areas of the public rangelands which are representative of the broad spectrum of range conditions, trends, and forage values, a program which provides incentives to, or rewards for, the holders of grazing permits and leases whose stewardship results in an improvement of the range condition of lands under permit or lease. Such program shall explore innovative grazing management policies and systems which might provide incentives to improve range conditions. These may include, but need not be limited to—

(1) cooperative range management projects designed to foster a greater degree of cooperation and coordination between the Federal and State agencies charged with the management of the rangelands and with local private range users,

(2) the payment of up to 50 per centum of the amount due the Federal Government from grazing permittees in the form of range improvement work,

(3) such other incentives as he may deem appropriate.

#### (b) Report to Congress

No later than December 31, 1985, the Secretaries shall report to the Congress the results of such experimental program, their evaluation of the fee established in section 1905 of this title and other grazing fee options, and their recommendations to implement a grazing fee schedule for the 1986 and subsequent grazing years.

(Pub. L. 95–514, §12, Oct. 25, 1978, 92 Stat. 1808.)
EXHIBIT 99.2

    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  Forsyth  Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003, as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Timothy D. Foreman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18  U.S.C.  Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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/ Timothy D. Foreman
                                   --------------------------------------------
                                   Timothy D. Foreman, Secretary and Treasurer
                                   (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


Date:  May 9, 2003
       -----------


                                       21
<PAGE>
§ 58.60 Preparation and filing of environmental impact statements. ( a ) The responsible entity must prepare the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and the final environmental impact statements (FEIS) using the current HUD recommended format or its equivalent.
( b ) The responsible entity must file and distribute the (DEIS) and the (FEIS) in the following manner: ( 1 ) Five copies to EPA Headquarters;
( 2 ) Five copies to EPA Regional Office;
( 3 ) Copies made available in the responsible entity's and the recipient's office;
( 4 ) Copies or summaries made available to persons who request them; and
( 5 ) FEIS only—one copy to State, HUD Field Office, and HUD Headquarters library.
( c ) The responsible entity may request waivers from the time requirements specified for the draft and final EIS as prescribed in 40 CFR 1506.6.
( d ) When substantial changes are proposed in a project or when significant new circumstances or information becomes available during an environmental review, the recipient may prepare a supplemental EIS as prescribed in 40 CFR 1502.9.
( e ) The responsible entity must prepare a Record of Decision (ROD) as prescribed in 40 CFR 1505.2.
[61 FR 19122, Apr. 30, 1996, as amended at 63 FR 15272, Mar. 30, 1998]
### §4702. Abandonment of barge prohibited

An owner or operator of a barge may not abandon it on the navigable waters of the United States. A barge is deemed not to be abandoned if—

(1) it is located at a Federally- or State-approved mooring area;

(2) it is on private property with the permission of the owner of the property; or

(3) the owner or operator notifies the Secretary that the barge is not abandoned and the location of the barge.

(Added Pub. L. 102–587, title V, §5302, Nov. 4, 1992, 106 Stat. 5082; amended Pub. L. 109–304, §15(18), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1703.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–304 struck out subsec. (a) designation before "An owner".
#### Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland, appellant, v. James Stenson, appellee.

Gen. No. 28,487.

Action on indemnity agreement. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Robert E. Gentzel, Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the March term, 1923.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 2, 1923.

Mayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.

Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.
#### COX *vs.*HARRIS.

[ACTION AGAINST INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF FIRM, FOUNDED ON JUfi'GMÍÍNT AGAINST THE FIRM IN ITS FIRM NAME ONLY.].

1. *Partner; how may be sued to enforce firm liability.*— A judgment against a partnership in its firm name alone, will support an action against an individual member of the firm to enforce his individual liability for the firm debts.

2. *Same.*— The individual liability of each partner for the debts of the firm is not so merged by a judgment against the firm in its firm name only, as to prevent a suit on such judgment against an individual member of the firm to enforce his liability to pay its debts. Judgments, under the provisions of section 2559 of the Revised Code, are in law joint as well as several.

*539Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macon.

Tried before Hon. Littleberry Strange.

The appellee prosecuted to judgment a suit against the firm of Herrin, Marquis *& Go.*The names of the individual partners were not given, but the firm was sued merely as a firm, and judgment was rendered against the firm merely.

After the recovery of this judgment, it not having been paid, the appellee brought suit on it against the appellant Cox, who was a member of said firm, and recovered judgment against him before a justice of the peace. Cox appealed to the circuit court, where, on a trial *de novo,*judgment was again rendered against him. Cox appeals, and insists in this court, that his individual liability as a member of the firm could not be enforced by suit against him on a judgment rendered against the firm.

Graham *&*Abercrombie, for appellant.

Ligón *&*Cobb, *contra.*

PETERS, J.

The judgment against the firm in its firm name alone bound only the “joint property of all the associates.” — Eev. Code, § 2538. Yet there can be no doubt that each partner is individually liable for the debts of the firm.—*Waldron, Isley & Co. v. Simmons,*28 Ala. 620; Collyer on Part. (Perkins’ ed.) p. 348, *et seq.; Thomas v. Hearn et al.,*2 Porter. The mere reductiqn of a claim against a partnership sued in their firm name is not a payment or satisfaction of the claim. It is simply merged in the judgment, and this judgment becomes the foundation of a new suit. It is perfectly certain that a judgment is a proper cause of action in an independent suit. — 3 Bouv. Law Dic. “ Merger,” p. 175; 2 Black. Com. p. 465, (marg.); 1 Chit. Pl. pp. 111, 112, (marg.) It may be objected, that the first judgment against the firm of Herrin, Marquis *&*Co. is joint, and not several. This was so at common law, but it is changed by our statute. This makes “judgments” “joint' *540and several.” — Revised Code, § 2539. Then this objection, had it been properly interposed in the court below, is of no avail.

Let the judgment be affirmed, with costs.
**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 Annual Report of Ignis Petroleum Group, Inc. (the “Company”)
        on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Piazza,
        Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
        1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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/
        Michael Piazza
 Michael
        Piazza
 Chief
        Executive Officer
 
 Date:  October
        15, 2007
### §1902. Availability of Government publications through Superintendent of Documents; lists of publications not ordered from Government Publishing Office

Government publications, except those determined by their issuing components to be required for official use only or for strictly administrative or operational purposes which have no public interest or educational value and publications classified for reasons of national security, shall be made available to depository libraries through the facilities of the Superintendent of Documents for public information. Each component of the Government shall furnish the Superintendent of Documents a list of such publications it issued during the previous month, that were obtained from sources other than the Government Publishing Office.

(Pub. L. 90–620, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1283; Pub. L. 113–235, div. H, title I, §1301(b), Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2537.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on 44 U.S. Code, 1964 ed., §81b (Pub. L. 87–579, §1, Aug. 9, 1962, 76 Stat. 352).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

"Government Publishing Office" substituted for "Government Printing Office" in section catchline and text on authority of section 1301(b) of Pub. L. 113–235, set out as a note preceding section 301 of this title.
#### § 886.336 Audit.

Where a non-Federal entity (as defined in 2 CFR 200.69) is the eligible owner of a project receiving financial assistance under this part, the audit requirements in 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, shall apply.

[80 FR 75941, Dec. 7, 2015]
§ 100.75 Discriminatory advertisements, statements and notices. ( a ) It shall be unlawful to make, print or publish, or cause to be made, printed or published, any notice, statement or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling which indicates any preference, limitation or discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation or discrimination.
( b ) The prohibitions in this section shall apply to all written or oral notices or statements by a person engaged in the sale or rental of a dwelling. Written notices and statements include any applications, flyers, brochures, deeds, signs, banners, posters, billboards or any documents used with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling.
( c ) Discriminatory notices, statements and advertisements include, but are not limited to: ( 1 ) Using words, phrases, photographs, illustrations, symbols or forms which convey that dwellings are available or not available to a particular group of persons because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
( 2 ) Expressing to agents, brokers, employees, prospective sellers or renters or any other persons a preference for or limitation on any purchaser or renter because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin of such persons.
( 3 ) Selecting media or locations for advertising the sale or rental of dwellings which deny particular segments of the housing market information about housing opportunities because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
( 4 ) Refusing to publish advertising for the sale or rental of dwellings or requiring different charges or terms for such advertising because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
( d ) 24 CFR part 109 provides information to assist persons to advertise dwellings in a nondiscriminatory manner and describes the matters the Department will review in evaluating compliance with the Fair Housing Act and in investigating complaints alleging discriminatory housing practices involving advertising.
#### § 574.660 Housing counseling.

Housing counseling, as defined in § 5.100, that is funded with or provided in connection with HOPWA funds must be carried out in accordance with § 5.111. When grantees provide housing services to eligible persons (including persons undergoing relocation) that are incidental to a larger set of holistic case management services, these services do not meet the definition of housing counseling, as defined in § 5.100, and therefore are not required to be carried out in accordance with the certification requirements of § 5.111.

[81 FR 90659, Dec. 14, 2016, as amended at 82 FR 8811, Jan. 31, 2017]
#### § 904.307 Alternative to HBA.

Where the homes are on scattered sites (noncontiguous lots throughout a multi-block area, with no common property), or where the number of homes may be too few to support an HBA, and where an alternative method for homebuyer representation and continuing counseling is provided, an HBA shall not be required. For such cases, a modified form of homebuyers association may be called for or a less formal organization may be desirable. This decision shall be made jointly by the LHA and the homebuyers, acting on the recommendation of HUD.
§ 902.5 Applicability. ( a ) *PHAs, RMCs, AMEs.* This part applies to PHAs, Resident Management Corporations (RMCs), and AMEs. This part is also applicable to RMCs that receive direct funding from HUD in accordance with section 20 of the 1937 Act (DF-RMCs). ( 1 ) *Scoring of RMCs and AMEs.* ( i ) RMCs and DF-RMCs will be assessed and issued their own numeric scores under PHAS based on the public housing or portions of public housing that they manage and the responsibilities they assume that can be scored under PHAS. References in this part to PHAs include RMCs, unless stated otherwise. References in this part to RMCs include DF-RMCs, unless stated otherwise.
( ii ) AMEs are not issued PHAS scores. The performance of the AME contributes to the PHAS score of the project(s)/PHA(s) for which they assumed management responsibilities.
( 2 ) *ACC.* The ACC makes a PHA legally responsible for all public housing operations, except where DF-RMC assumes management operations. ( i ) Because the PHA and not the RMC or AME is ultimately responsible to HUD under the ACC, the PHAS score of a PHA will be based on all of the projects covered by the ACC, including those with management operations assumed by an RMC or AME (including a court-ordered or administrative receivership agreement, if applicable).
( ii ) A PHA's PHAS score will not be based on projects managed by a DF-RMC.
( 3 ) This part does not apply to Moving-to-Work (MTW) agencies that are specifically exempted in their grant agreement.
( b ) *Implementation of PHAS.* The regulations in this part are applicable to PHAs beginning with the first fiscal year end date after the effective date of this rule, and thereafter.
##### 



Exhibit 99.2 ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCEPrincipal Life Income Fundings Trust 2004-25 (the Trust) I, Nancy H. Forte, a duly elected and acting officer of Citibank, N.A. (Indenture Trustee),
do hereby certify on behalf of the Indenture Trustee, that: 1. I have reviewed and examined the performance by the Indenture Trustee of the application of
trust money collected by the Indenture Trustee pursuant to Section 5.02 and, if applicable, Section
6.06 of the Indenture pursuant to which the Trusts notes were issued during the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2004 (the Relevant Year); and 2. Based upon my review and examination described in 1 above, and except as provided in the
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Compliance, dated March 15, 2005,
prepared by the Ernst & Young LLP substantially in accordance with Section 4.05 of the Expense and
Indemnity Agreement, to the best of my knowledge, the application of trust money collected by the
Indenture Trustee pursuant to Section 5.02 and, if applicable, Section 6.06 of the Indenture was
performed in accordance with the terms of the Indenture throughout the Relevant Year. CITIBANK, N.A., as Indenture Trustee By:
    /s/ Nancy H. ForteName:
    Nancy H. ForteTitle:
    Assistant Vice President Date: March 29, 2005
§ 599.1 Applicability and scope. ( a ) This part establishes requirements and procedures applicable to the designation of Renewal Communities (RCs) through December 31, 2001, authorized under Subchapter X of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1400E, *et seq.*). HUD may choose to use these requirements and procedures in whole or in part for any future Renewal Community designations that may be authorized.
( b ) This part contains provisions relating to area requirements, the nomination process for Renewal Communities, and the evaluation and designation of nominated areas by HUD.
#### Finleyson *v.*International Harvester Company.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where, in 1907, a promissory note was given in renewal of an original note which had been executed in 1903, for the purchase-price of a mowing machine and rake, and in the latter note it was recited, that, “in consideration of this renewal contract and the extension of time hereby given, it is agreed that said payee has fully kept and made good all its representations, warranties, and obligations in the sale of said machine,” a recovery on such note could not. be. prevented, or the amount thereof reduced, on the ground that when the sale was made and the original note given the agent of the plaintiff agreed that the plaintiff would open an agency for supplies at a named place where the purchaser could conveniently get supplies and repairs for the mower; that this furnished a consideration for the note; and that the seller had not complied with such agreement. Accordingly in a suit on such note, it was not error, as against such a defense, to direct a verdict for the principal and interest specified on the face of the note. *American Car Co.*v. *Atlanta Street Ry. Co.,*100 *Ga.*254 (28 S. E. 40); *Atlanta City Street Ry. Co.*v. *American Car Co.,*103 *Ga.*254 (29 S. E. 925); *Atlanta Consolidated Bottling Co.*v. *Hutchinson,*109 *Ga.*550 (35 S. E. 124); *Madison Supply & Hardware Co.*v. *Brown Carriage Co.,*137 *Ga.*195 (73 S. E. 344).

2. Where a promissory note, in addition, to principal and interest, provided for the payment of “reasonable attorney’s fees in collecting by suit or otherwise,” the judge was not authorized to direct a verdict for a certain amount as attorney’s fees because of the testimony of a member of the bar that such amount would be reasonable; although there was no conflicting evidence on the subject. *Baker*v. *Richmond City Mill Works,*105 *Ga.*225 (31 S. E. 426); *Jennings*v. *Stripling,*127 *Ga.*778, 785 (56 S. E. 1026); *Proctor*v. *Crooker,*129 *Ga.*732 (59 S. E. 781); *McCarthy*v. *Lazarus,*137 *Ga.*282 (72 S. E. 493).

3. Direction is given that if, within twenty days from the filing of the remittitur in the office of the clerk of the superior court, the defendant in error will write off from the verdict the amount of attorney’s fees *248included therein, the judgment will stand affirmed; otherwise it will be reversed and a new trial granted.

June 12, 1912.

Complaint. Before Judge Whipple. Wilcox superior court. March 20, 1911.

*Dan B. Bruce,*for plaintiff in error. *Hal Lawson,*contra.

(а) It is stated in the brief of counsel for defendant in error that he has written off the recovery of attorney’s fees; but there is nothing in the record or bill of exceptions to show that this has been done; and this court is bound to act upon what appears from the record and bill of exceptions.

(б) As the plaintiff in error has obtained a material modification of the judgment which was rendered against him in the trial court, judgment is rendered in his favor for the costs of bringing the case to this court, and the costs in this court.

*Judgment affirmed, on condition.*

*AU the Justices concur.*
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

November 21, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00659

- CV

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO

, Appellant

v.

Margarita LOPEZ

, Appellee

From the County Court a t Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CV05720 Honorable John Longoria, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The reporter’s record wa s due to be filed with this court on Octo ber 2 5 , 201 9

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 35.1. After the due date , court reporter Kimberly Rice Lobello filed a first notification of late reporter’s record. She request ed a n extension of time to file the record until Decem ber
18 , 201 9

. The request is GRANTED IN PART . The reporter’s record is due on Novem ber 2 5

, 201 9

. See id. R. 35.3(c) (limiting an extension in an ord inary appeal to thirty days).

If the reporter’s record is not filed with this court by Novemb er 25 , 201 9 , any requests for additional time to file the record must be accompanied by a signed, written status report.

The report must describe the transcrip t by day with the date, description, page counts, and remarks for each day. The page counts must include the total number of pages, the number of pages edited, proofread, and formatted into the required electronic form (including bookmarks).

The report may describe any unusual aspects of the record. The report must describe any problems the court reporter reasonably believes may delay the completion of the record beyond the requested date.

A preferred form for the status report, with an accompanying example, is attached to this
order._________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 21st day of November, 2019

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz , Clerk of Court