alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**
**EXHIBIT 31**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Nancy Willis, certifythat: 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Sabine Royalty Trust, for whichArgent Trust Company acts as Trustee; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit 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 materialrespects the financial condition, distributable income and changes in trust corpus of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)), or for causing such controls and procedures to be established and maintained, for the registrant and I have: 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under mysupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to bedesigned under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes; 

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report myconclusions 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 

d) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe 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 overfinancial reporting; and 

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors: 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol 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 persons who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting. 

Date: February 29, 2024 

 
  By: /s/  Nancy Willis       Nancy Willis   Director of Royalty Trust Services   Argent Trust Company**
- Program Home
- Key Topics
- Circular Notes and Notices

HomeDiplomatic Motor Vehicle Program...Key Topics – Diplomatic Motor Vehicle Program

# 									Key Topics – Diplomatic Motor Vehicle Program							

        - Registration and Titling
        - Diplomatic Parking Ticket Programs in New York and the District of Columbia
        - Driver Services
        - OFM Enforcement of Moving Violations
        - Vehicle Liability Insurance Requirements
        - DMV FAQs
        - Information for Law Enforcement

Back to Top
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7657

DAMION MONTEZ MOSLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RUSTBURG CORRECTIONAL UNIT #9, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-657-7) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 9, 2002 Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Damion Montez Mosley, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Damion Montez Mosley appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. §2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001) for failure to exhaust state remedies. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Mosley v. Rustburg Corr. Unit #9 , No. CA-01- 657-7 (W.D. Va. Aug. 30, 2001). 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
#### ALBERT *v.*PATTERSON.

Limitation of Actions — Foreclosure of Mortgages — Deficiency Decree — Execution.

Since under the statutes of limitation (8 Oomp. Laws, § 9751) a foreclosure decree is barred after ten years, execution may not issue on a decree of foreclosure entered December 11, 1899, on which a deficiency was reported March 3, 1900, by the commissioner after sale of the premises, complainant having made application on November 29, 1909, for leave to issue execution which was not issued until December 18, 1909.

Appeal from Kent; Perkins, J.

Submitted June 16, 1911.

(Docket No. 79.)

Decided October 2, 1911.

Bill in aid of execution by Margaret Albert against Clara Patterson and Edward H. Patterson. From an order overruling a demurrer to complainant’s bill, defendants appeal.

Reversed.

*William Wisner Taylor,*for complainant.

*Walker & Fitzgerald,*for defendants.

Blair, J.

Defendants appeal from an order overrul*163ing their demurrer to complainant’s bill in aid of execution. On December 11, 1899, complainant obtained a final decree on foreclosure of a land contract against defendant Clara Patterson and others. On March 3, 1900, the commissioner made sale of the premises and reported a deficiency of 1563.16. On November 29, 1909, complainant made application to the court for leave to issue execution for such deficiency, which was granted December 13, 1909, and execution was issued on December 14, 1909. On February 25, 1910, complainant filed this bill of complaint, to which the defendants demurred, upon the ground that the execution was invalid for the reason that the statute of limitations had run against the original decree when the execution was allowed and issued.

We regard this question as settled in favor of the demurrants by our decision in *Quinnin*v. Quinnin, 144 Mich. 232 (107 N. W. 906).

A question is raised by complainant as to the estoppel of defendants against presenting the above ground of demurrer by reason of their alleged conduct in delaying the issuance of the execution and procuring a stay of proceedings, which we do not deem it proper to determine upon this record.

The order is reversed, and the demurrer sustained, with leave to complainant to amend her bill so as to set up the claimed estoppel, if she is so advised, within 20 days after notice of this decision.

Ostrander, O. J., and Bird, Brooke, and Stone, JJ., concurred.
Exhibit 23
  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
  The Board of Directors
 The Wilber Corporation:
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-16061 on Form S-3 of The Wilber Corporation of our report dated March 29, 2011 with respect to the consolidated statements of condition of The Wilber Corporation as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity and comprehensive income and cash flows for the years then ended, which report appears in the December 31, 2010 annual report on Form 10-K of The Wilber Corporation.
  /s/KPMG LLP
  Albany, New York
  March 29, 2011
Exhibit
32.2


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. §1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of SpectraScience, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James Dorst, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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/
      James DorstJames
      Dorst
                Chief
      Financial Officer
                Date:
      August 16, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATIN EXTRCTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STTEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OFITS
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         150,339
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,160
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               193,499
<PP&E>                                       1,034,198
<DEPRECIATION>                                 734,071
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 493,626
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     493,626
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   493,626
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               105,370
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   35,731
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   123,409
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 485.508 Condition of participation: Compliance with Federal, state, and local laws and regulations. ( a ) The REH must be in compliance with applicable Federal laws related to the health and safety of patients.
( b ) The REH must be located in a state that provides for the licensing of such hospitals under state or applicable local law; and is ( 1 ) Licensed in the state as an REH; or
( 2 ) Approved as meeting standards for licensing established by the agency of the state or locality responsible for licensing hospitals.
( c ) The REH must assure that personnel are licensed or meet other applicable standards that are required by state or local laws to provide services within the applicable scope of practice.
§ 455.432 Site visits. The State Medicaid agency— ( a ) Must conduct pre-enrollment and post-enrollment site visits of providers who are designated as “moderate” or “high” categorical risks to the Medicaid program. The purpose of the site visit will be to verify that the information submitted to the State Medicaid agency is accurate and to determine compliance with Federal and State enrollment requirements.
( b ) Must require any enrolled provider to permit CMS, its agents, its designated contractors, or the State Medicaid agency to conduct unannounced on-site inspections of any and all provider locations.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1836 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1836

  To amend the acquisition authority for land for the development of 
 visitor and administrative facilities at Weir Farm National Historic 
                   Site in the State of Connecticut.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2007

  Mr. Shays introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the acquisition authority for land for the development of 
 visitor and administrative facilities at Weir Farm National Historic 
                   Site in the State of Connecticut.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Weir Farm National Historic Site 
Amendment Act''.

SEC. 2. LOCATION OF VISITOR AND ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES FOR WEIR FARM 
              NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE.

    Section 4(d) of the Weir Farm National Historic Site Establishment 
Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``contiguous to'' and 
        all that follows and inserting ``within Fairfield County.'';
            (2) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
            ``(2) Development.--
                    ``(A) Maintaining natural character.--The Secretary 
                shall keep development of the property acquired under 
                paragraph (1) to a minimum so that the character of the 
                acquired property will be similar to the natural and 
                undeveloped landscape of the property described in 
                subsection (b).
                    ``(B) Treatment of previously developed property.--
                Nothing in subparagraph (A) shall either prevent the 
                Secretary from acquiring property under paragraph (1) 
                that, prior to the Secretary's acquisition, was 
                developed in a manner inconsistent with subparagraph 
                (A), or require the Secretary to remediate such 
                previously developed property to reflect the natural 
                character described in subparagraph (A).''; and
            (3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``the appropriate zoning 
        authority'' and all that follows through ``Wilton, 
        Connecticut,'' and inserting the following: ``the chief elected 
        official of the unit of local government having jurisdiction 
        over the property acquired under paragraph (1) (as determined 
        in accordance with applicable State law)''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 441.13 Prohibitions on FFP: Institutionalized individuals. ( a ) FFP is not available in expenditures for services for— ( 1 ) Any individual who is in a public institution, as defined in § 435.1010 of this chapter; or
( 2 ) Any individual who is under age 65 and is in an institution for mental diseases, except an individual who is under age 22 and receiving inpatient psychiatric services under subpart D of this part.
( b ) With the exception of active treatment services (as defined in § 483.440(a) of this chapter for residents of ICFs/IID and in § 441.154 for individuals under age 21 receiving inpatient psychiatric services), payments to institutions for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities or persons with related conditions and to psychiatric facilities or programs providing inpatient psychiatric services to individuals under age 21 may not include reimbursement for formal educational services or for vocational services. Formal educational services relate to training in traditional academic subjects. Subject matter rather than setting, time of day, or class size determines whether a service is educational. Traditional academic subjects include, but are not limited to, science, history, literature, foreign languages, and mathematics. Vocational services relate to organized programs that are directly related to the preparation of individuals for paid or unpaid employment. An example of vocational services is time-limited vocational training provided as a part of a regularly scheduled class available to the general public.
( c ) FFP is not available in expenditures for services furnished by an organ procurement organization on or after April 1, 1988, that does not meet the requirements of part 486 subpart G of this chapter.
[43 FR 45229, Sept. 29, 1978, as amended at 51 FR 22041, June 17, 1986; 53 FR 6549, Mar. 1, 1988; 57 FR 54709, Nov. 20, 1992; 71 FR 31046, May 31, 2006; 71 FR 39229, July 12, 2006]
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14
- 6439

PRESTON S. LEWIS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. ANGELA P. DUNBAR, Warden , Respondent

- Appellee

.

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

. James C. Dever III , District Judge. ( 5:13

- hc

- 02169

- D )

Submitted : December 21, 2018 Decided: January 7, 2019

Before KEENAN, THACKER , and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by un published per curiam opinion

.

Preston S. Lewis , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Preston S. Lewis, a federal prisoner, appeal s from the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. The district court ruled that Lewis’ challenge to his career offender designation was not cognizable under § 2241 pursuant to
In re Jones , 226 F.3d 328 (4th Cir. 2000). Ho wever, when it issued its decision, the
district court did not have the benefit of our recent decisions in Lester v. Flournoy , 909
F.3d 708 (4th Cir. 2018), and United States v. Wheeler , 886 F.3d 415 (4th Cir. 2018) , petition for cert. filed , __ U.S.L.W. __ (U.S. Oct. 3, 2018) (No. 18

- 420)

. In both cases, we held that an inmate may, under certain circumstances, challenge the legality of his sentence in a § 2241 petition. Lester , 909 F.3d at 711

- 12 ; Wheeler , 886 F. 3d at 426

- 29. Accordingly, we grant lea ve to proceed in forma pauperis, vacate the district court’s order, and remand this case for further consideration of Lewis’ petition in light of
Lester and Wheeler . We deny as moot Lewis’ motions to amend. We dispense with oral argument because the fact s and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Clyde WELLS v. 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF LAFOURCHE.

No. 63855.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 16, 1979.

In re Clyde Wells applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Lafourche.

Writ denied. Application is moot.
#### Victoria Vallauri, Respondent, *v.*W. C. Loftus *&*Co., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term,

March, 1899.)

Summary proceedings — Forcible entry involves intimidation or violence.

A summary proceeding to remove a person for forcible entry is not maintainable upon proof that the defendant, claiming rights in the petitioner’s basement, employed a carpenter to remove a partition which prevented access thereto, and that while the work was going on. the petitioner appeared, remonstrated and then left voluntarily; there-being no evidence of threats,- intimidation or actual violence upon the part of the defendant or his agents.

Aepeal from a final order in favor of the petitioner, made in a proceeding in the Municipal Court of the city of ¡New York„ borough of Manhattan, for the sixth district.

John M. Stearns, for appellant.

Sol. Kohn, for respondent.

Leventritt, J.

This proceeding was taken for forcible entry and detainer. It appears that the petitioner was, on the 20th of July, 1898, the occupant of a certain store at ¡No. 1189 Broadway, and of the adjoining basement. The defendant claimed right of possession to the basement, but a partition prevented access thereto. During the absence of the petitioner a carpenter, employed by the defendant, removed a substantial portion of the partition, and entry was thereupon made. At this stage the plaintiff returned and found the carpenter and the defendant’s porter on the-premises. She remonstrated and then voluntarily left the basement. There was no intimidation, no threats were made, and no-force or violence was used against her. She admits that the man was quietly proceeding with the work, and was courteous and polite. The petitioner relies solely upon the partial removal of the partition to establish the forcible entry and detainer, having made no further attempts to regain possession of the basement.

*761The state of facts disclosed are insufficient to sustain the proceeding.

The petitioner relies solely on her allegation of forcible entry,.there being no pretense of forcible detainer. We find in the facts disclosed, at most, a mere trespass. There is an absence of' all the elements essential to the maintenance of the proceeding. The entry was not riotous, or accompanied with any force, violence, threats, or intimidation. The mere -unauthorized removal of a< portion of the partition cannot convert the peaceable entry into- a forcible one. People v. Smith, 24 Barb. 16; Wood v. Phillips, 43 N. Y. 157; Willard v. Warren, 17 Wend. 257. Under the authorities we are constrained to reverse the order.

Freedman, P. J., and MacLean, J., concur.

Order reversed, with costs to appellant to abide event.
#### § 4.3 Purpose of the Library.

The purpose of the Library is to assist the advancement of medical and related sciences and aid the dissemination and exchange of scientific and other information important to the progress of medicine and the public health. The Library acquires and maintains library materials pertinent to medicine, including audiovisual materials; compiles, publishes, and disseminates catalogs, indices, and bibliographies of these materials, as appropriate; makes available materials, through loan or otherwise; provides reference and other assistance to research; and engages in other activities in furtherance of this purpose.