alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.1


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
General Communication, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
33-60728 and No. 33-60222) on Forms S-8 of General Communication, Inc. of our
report dated February 20, 2004, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets
of General Communication, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and
2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2003, which report appears in the December 31, 2003, annual report
on Form 10-K of General Communication, Inc.



                                                          /s/

                                                          KPMG LLP


Anchorage, Alaska
March 10, 2004
**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 Roebling Financial Corp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, we, Frank J. Travea, III, Chief Executive Officer, and Janice A. Summers, Chief Financial Officer, 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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

A signed original of this 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 upon request.

 

 

 

| /s/ Frank J. Travea, III              |   | /s/ Janice A. Summers                                                      |
|---------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frank J. Travea, III                  |   | Janice A. Summers                                                          |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |   | Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                  |   |                                                                       |

 

| Date: | December 29, 2009 |
|-------|-------------------|
| 1.   | The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 3, 2010, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “Quarterly Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition at the end of the period covered by the Quarterly Report and results of operations of the Company for the periods covered by the Quarterly Report. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: November 12, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Shirley Yin    |   |
|-------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |   | Shirley Yin             |   |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |
### §§614 to 614d. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 614, act Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 809, §1, 70 Stat. 775, related to authorization for construction, operation, and maintenance of Washoe project, which was revoked by Pub. L. 101–618, title II, §205(c), Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3307.

Section 614a, act Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 809, §2, 70 Stat. 775, related to applicability of reclamation laws to duties of Secretary under this subchapter, repayment of construction costs, and contracts for supplemental water supply.

Section 614b, act Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 809, §3, 70 Stat. 776, related to facilities for access, public health and safety, and protection of public property on lands of Washoe project.

Section 614c, act Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 809, §4, 70 Stat. 777, related to facilities for development of fish and wildlife resources on the project area.

Section 614d, acts Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 809, §5, 70 Stat. 777; Aug. 21, 1958, Pub. L. 85–706, 72 Stat. 705, provided an authorization for appropriations for the project.
#### Sheepshead Cycle Shop, Inc., Respondent, v Cuevas Bicycles, Ltd., et al., Defendants, and Angelo Finocchiaro, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for fraud, defendant Angelo Finocchiaro appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 10, 1977, which denied his motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiff-respondent’s allegations are sufficient to constitute a cause of action to recover damages for fraud and to apprise appellant of what is to be established at the trial. The five elements that constitute a cause of action for fraud are pleaded (see *Ochs v*Woods, 221 NY 335, 338; accord *Channel Master Corp. v Aluminum Ltd. Sales,*4 NY2d 403) and they are sufficiently particularized to give appellant notice of the transactions or occurrences intended to be proved (see CPLR 3013; 3016, subd [b]; *Foley v D’Agostino,*21 AD2d 60, 64). They are not the "bare allegations of fraud” that have been held to be insufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss a pleading (see *Meltzer v Klein,*29 AD2d 548). Whether plaintiff can establish the allegations of its complaint is "necessarily reserved for trial” (see *Channel Master Corp. v Aluminum Ltd. Sales, supra,*p 408; cf. *Brady & Co. v Concrete Plank Co.,*56 AD2d 591). Latham, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
#### CARROLL et al., Adm’rs, *vs.*VAUGHAN, Ex’r.

[appeal prom judgment setting aside JUDGMENT, ON MOTION eoe supersedeas AND GRANTING NEW TRIAL.]

1. *Appeal; what judgment will not suppoii.*— A judgment of the circuit court granting a new trial under section 2814 of the Revised Code, is not such a final judgment as will support an appeal. — 42 Ala. 31, 167.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Marengo.

Tried before Hon. Lxjther R. Smith.

Wm. M. Brooks, for appellant.

Watts *&*Troy, contra,

PETERS, J.

This is a proceeding to set aside a judgment and grant a rehearing under the statute. — Rev. Code, § 2814. The prayer of the petition was granted in the court below, and a rehearing was allowed. The respondents in the proceeding for rehearing, and the plaintiffs in the judgment, appeal to this court. They assign for error the overruling of their demurrer to the petition, and the judgment of the court setting aside the judgment and granting a new trial.

The Code declares, that “ where a party has been prevented mailing his defense by surprise, accident, mistake, or fraud, without fault on his part, he may, in like manner, apply for a rehearing, at anytime within four months from the rendition of the judgment.” — Rev. Code, § 2814. In treating of this statute, this court has declared, that “the petition must he regarded as a new action, the object o,f *353wbicb was to obtain a rehearing and trial on tbe merits in tbe original action, and to vacate tbe judgment wbicb bad been rendered in *it.”*— Pratt *& McKenzie v. Keils & Sylvester,*28 Ala. 390, 397; *Garrett & Bibb v. Terry,*33 Ala. 514, 515. But tbe judgment granting tbe rebearing is not final. It does not put an end to tbe suit. It is interlocutory. From sucb a judgment there is no *appeal.*— Calla*han v. Lott, Adm’r,*42 Ala. 167; *Lockhart v. Wyatt,*42 Ala. 31; *Fuller and Wife v. Boggs,*January term, 1872. On tbe authority of these cases tbe appeal must be dismissed, at appellants’ cost. — See, also, 28 Ala. 390, 399.

Tbe appeal is therefore dismissed, at appellants’ costs.
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**In connection with the Quarterly Report of National Oilwell Varco, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Merrill A. Miller, Jr., Chairman, President andChief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and(ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.The certification is given to the knowledge of the undersigned.       *By:* */s/ Merrill A. Miller, Jr.*             Name: Merrill A. Miller, Jr.      Title: Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer      Date: August 2, 2007    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been providedto National Oilwell Varco, Inc. and will be retained by National Oilwell Varco, Inc., and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
29
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 63 (Tuesday, April 2, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 19632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07525]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary of Labor

29 CFR Part 15

Employment and Training Administration

20 CFR Parts 638 and 670

RIN 1290-AA25

Administrative Claims Under the Federal Tort Claims Act and 
Related Statutes

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Employment and Training 
Administration, Department of Labor.

ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: With this document, the Department of Labor (DOL) is 
withdrawing its proposed rule that accompanied its direct final rule 
revising the regulations governing administrative claims under the 
Federal Tort Claims Act and related statutes.

DATES: Effective April 2, 2013 the proposed rule published on April 13, 
2012 (77 FR 22236), is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine P. Carter, Counsel for 
Claims and Compensation, Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of 
Labor, Room S-4325, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, 
Telephone: 202-693-5320 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals 
with hearing or speech impairments may access this telephone number via 
TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 13, 2012, DOL published a direct 
final rule (77 FR 22204) and concurrent notice of proposed rulemaking, 
proposing to amend the regulations governing administrative claims 
under the Federal Tort Claims Act and related statutes. In both the 
direct final rule and notice of proposed rulemaking, DOL explained that 
if no significant adverse comments were received to the notice of 
proposed rulemaking, DOL would withdraw the proposed rule and the 
direct final rule would become effective on July 12, 2012 without 
further notice. DOL has received no comments regarding either the 
direct final rule or the notice of proposed rulemaking. Accordingly, 
DOL is not proceeding with the proposed rule and is withdrawing it from 
the rulemaking process. DOL is also confirming the effective date of 
the direct final rule as July 12, 2012.

    Signed at Washington, DC, the 28th of February, 2013.
M. Patricia Smith,
Solicitor of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2013-07525 Filed 4-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-23-P
```
**Exhibit 31.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION**
 
 I, Hugh Miller, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
 
 1.
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Delta Financial Corporation;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)) 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; andc.
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter 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 controls 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; andb.
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:  November 10, 2004
 
 
 Hugh Miller
 *President and Chief Executive Officer*
Order entered Novem ber 13 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 15
- 00687
- CR
CHRISTY ALLANE RODRI GUEZ, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Court

Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 064768 

### O RDER On September 8, 2015, this Court struck the first Anders brief filed by counsel because it did not satisfy the requirements of Anders v. California and its progeny. Specifically, we noted

t he brief d id not address t he trial court’s rulings on appellant’s pretrial motions, voir dire, the trial court’s evidentiary rulings, the jury charges and any objections to them, the sentence imposed, or the sufficiency of trial counsel. We ordered counsel to file either an amende d Anders brief that addressed the complete trail, including the identified deficiencies, or to file a brief raising issues on the merits. The Court also granted counsel a thirty

- day extension of time to file the amended brief. On November 9, 2015, counse l filed a second Anders brief. Although th e new brief addresses the pretrial motions and the effectiveness of trial counsel, the brief makes no mention of voir dire or the jury charges f rom both the guilt and punishment phases of trial.Therefore, we conc lude the brief again does not satisfy the requirements of Anders v. California

.

Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal, this is the order of the Court.
We STRIKE the Anders brief filed on November 9, 2015.
We GRANT the September 1, 2015 motio n of Matthew Hamilton to withdraw as appellant’s counsel. We DIRECT the Clerk to remove Matthew Hamilton as appellant’s appointed attorney of record.
We ORDER the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant on this appeal and to transmit to this Court the order appointing new counsel with T WEN TY DAYS of the date of this order

. We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to the Honorable Brian Gary, Presiding Judge, 397th Judicial District Court; Matthew Hamilton; and the Grayson County District Attorney’s Office.
We ABATE the appeal to allow the trial court to comply with this order. We will reinstate the appeal twenty days from the date of this order or when the order appointing new counsel is received.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

DALLAS EUROPEAN AUTO, L.L.C.,

 Appellant,

v.

HAMID MASSOUDI D/B/A SPORT 

MOTOR CARS,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-12-00336-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law #1

of Collin County, Texas 

(TC#001-01761-2011) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Dallas European Auto, LLC, and Appellee, Hamid Massoudi d/b/a Sport Motor 

Cars, have jointly moved to dismiss this appeal. As permitted by the Rules of Appellate 

Procedure, an appeal may be dismissed “[i]n accordance with an agreement signed by the parties 

or their attorneys . . . .” TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(a)(2). Because Appellant and Appellee have

complied with the requirements of Rule 42.1, we grant the motion to dismiss and dismiss the 

appeal. While the motion itself does not set out an arrangement regarding costs, the proposed 

order attached to the motion does. Construing this pleading liberally each party will be taxed 

their own costs. See TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(d)(absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax 

costs against the appellant).

February 27, 2013

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.
§ 92.219 Recognition of matching contribution. ( a ) *Match contribution to HOME-assisted housing.* A contribution is recognized as a matching contribution if it is made with respect to: ( 1 ) A tenant who is assisted with HOME funds;
( 2 ) A HOME-assisted unit;
( 3 ) The portion of a project that is not HOME-assisted provided that at least 50 percent of the housing units in the project are HOME-assisted. If the match contribution to the portion of the project that is not HOME-assisted meets the affordable housing requirements of § 92.219(b)(2), the percentage requirement for HOME-assisted units does not apply; or
( 4 ) The commercial space in a mixed-use project in which at least 51 percent of the floor space is residential provided that at least 50 percent of the dwelling units are HOME-assisted.
( b ) *Match contribution to affordable housing that is not HOME-assisted.* The following requirements apply for recognition of matching contributions made to affordable housing that is not HOME-assisted: ( 1 ) For tenant-based rental assistance that is not HOME-assisted: ( i ) The contribution must be made with respect to a tenant who is assisted with tenant-based rental assistance that meets the requirements of § 92.203 (Income determinations) and paragraphs (a), (c), (f), and (i) of § 92.209 (Tenant-based rental assistance); and
( ii ) The participating jurisdiction must demonstrate in writing that such assistance meets the provisions of §§ 92.203 and 92.209 (except § 92.209(e)).
( 2 ) For affordable housing that is not HOME-assisted: ( i ) The contribution must be made with respect to housing that qualifies as affordable housing under § 92.252 or § 92.254.
( ii ) The participating jurisdiction or its instrumentality must execute, with the owner of the housing (or, if the participating jurisdiction is the owner, with the manager or developer), a written agreement that imposes and enumerates all of the affordability requirements from § 92.252 and § 92.253(a) and (b) (Tenant protections), or § 92.254, whichever are applicable; the property standards requirements of § 92.251; and income determinations made in accordance with § 92.203. This written agreement must be executed before any match contributions may be made.
( iii ) A participating jurisdiction must establish a procedure to monitor HOME match-eligible housing to ensure continued compliance with the requirements of §§ 92.203 (Income determinations), 92.252 (Qualification as affordable housing: Rental housing), 92.253(a) and (b) (Tenant protections) and 92.254 (Qualification as affordable housing: Homeownership). No other HOME requirements apply.
( iv ) The match may be in any eligible form of match except those in § 92.220(a)(2) (forbearance of fees), (a)(4) (on-site and off-site infrastructure), (a)(10) (direct cost of supportive services) and (a)(11) (direct costs of homebuyer counseling services).
( v ) Match contributions to mixed-use or mixed-income projects that contain affordable housing units will be recognized only if the contribution is made to the project's affordable housing units.
[61 FR 48750, Sept. 16, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 28929, May 28, 1997]
```

                                                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 Navistar International Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended January 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Daniel C. Ustian, 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
            result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Daniel C. Ustian
-------------------------------
Daniel C. Ustian
Chief Executive Officer
March 14, 2003

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant toss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed
filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

                                                           E-6
```