alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Transnational Industries, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Jonathan A. Shaw, President and 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/ Jonathan A. Shaw
--------------------
Jonathan A. Shaw
President and Chief Executive Officer

Dated: December 14, 2003

This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.49


                           BIG V SUPERMARKETS, INC.
                                PROMISSORY NOTE


For value received, the undersigned (the Obligor) promises to pay to the order
of Big V Holding Corp., a Delaware corporation, with its principal executive
offices located at 75 State Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109 (the Company),
the principal sum of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) (the Principal
Amount) in lawful money of the United States of America, together with all
accrued but unpaid interest, on March 20, 2003 (the Maturity Date), subject to
the terms outlined below:

 .  The note, together with accrued but unpaid interest thereon, will be due and
   payable if the Obligor leaves the employ of the Company at any time prior to
   the maturity date, other than a termination without cause (as defined in the
   undersigned's Employment Agreement with the Company).

 .  Interest shall accrue at the minimum rate allowed under Internal Revenue
   Service regulations.

In witness whereof, the Note has been duly executed and delivered by the Obligor
on the date first above written.


/s/ Mark S. Schwartz
--------------------
Mark Schwartz
2 White Tail Drive
Goshen, NY  10924

Date:   June 9, 2000
        ------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000795196
<NAME> JOHN HANCOCK REALTY INCOME FUND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                       3,227,372
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  195,646
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,383,004
<PP&E>                                      38,108,981
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,167,312
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              33,843,768
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          442,328
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,401,440
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                33,843,768
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,300,071
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  361,319
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                62,955
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,111,879
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,111,879
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,111,879
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    12.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    12.65
        

</TABLE>
#### Frederick H. Myers, Appellant, *v.*Charles Hussenbuth, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, eleventh district, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the defendant.

A. W. Birkins, for appellant.

Salter & Steinkamp, for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

There is an implied covenant in every hiring that the tenant will surrender the premises at the end of the term in as good condition as they were in at the commencement of the term, reasonable wear and tear and damages by the elements excepted. This obligation is not confined to cases of ordinary and gradual decay, but extends to accidental injuries. Hawkins v. Ringler, 47 Hun, 264; Cohn v. Hill, 9 Misc. Rep. 327; Kling v. Dress, 28 N. Y. Super. Ct. 525. It is true that in the cases above cited the lease was in writing and contained an express covenant on the part of the defendant to surrender the premises at the termination of the lease in as good condition as when leased, reasonable wear and tear excepted, and also to make all necessary repairs during the term, but an implied covenant is of as much binding force and effect as an express covenant.

This action is, in effect, an action for waste. In such actions it is well settled that the defendant is liable for waste, although the waste was not committed by him, but by strangers or other persons over whom he had no control. Regan v. Luthy, 16 Daly, 413; 28 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 888.

Judgment is reversed and new trial ordered in the Municipal Court, borough of Manhattan, eleventh judicial district, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present: Truax, P. J., and Dugro, J.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
429 A.2d 34

#### Cherie UNTERBERGER, Stanley Schlesinger, the Fidelity Bank, Trustees Under the Will of Herbert Unterberger, Appellants, v. LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued Dec. 2, 1980.

Filed April 24, 1981.

Roger J. Harrington, Philadelphia, for appellants.

M. Melvin Shralow, Philadelphia, for appellee.

Before SPAETH, BROSKY and HOFFMAN, JJ.

*470PER CURIAM:

This is an action in assumpsit, brought by appellants as trustees under the will of Herbert Unterberger to recover under an insurance policy issued by appellee on Unterber-ger’s life. Appellee refused payment on the ground that in applying for the policy, Unterberger misrepresented his medical history. The appeal must be quashed.

The lower court heard the case without a jury. On March 30,1979, the lower court’s finding for appellee was docketed. On April 11, on appellee’s praecipe, judgment was entered. On April 19 appellants moved for leave to file exceptions nunc pro tunc. On June 11 the lower court filed an order opening the judgment and granting leave to file exceptions within 10 days. Exceptions were filed. On September 14 the lower court filed an order denying the exceptions. On September 25 the lower court filed another order, which read, “Ordered and decreed that the plaintiff’s exceptions are denied and the rule dismissed.” This appeal is from the September 25 order.

Pa.R.A.P. 301(c) provides that “an order denying a motion for a new trial . . . does not constitute an appealable order.” “An order dismissing exceptions following a trial without a jury is in the same category as an order refusing a new trial.” *Penstan Supply, Inc. v. Hay,*283 Pa.Super. 558, 560, 424 A.2d 950, 951 (1981). Such an order does not become appealable until, “on praecipe of any party,” Pa.R.A.P. 301(d), it is “reduced to judgment and docketed,” Pa.R.A.P. 301(c). *And see*Pa.R.C.P. 1038(e). The requirement that judgment be docketed is jurisdictional. *Penstan Supply, Inc. v. Hay, supra.*Here, the lower court’s order of September 25 dismissing appellants’ exceptions was never reduced to judgment and docketed. The next entry on the docket is “Oct. 4 1979 Notice of Appeal.” 1

Appeal quashed.

1

. We acknowledge that we do not understand the purpose of the lower court’s order of September 25. As recited in stating the case, the lower court had already dismissed appellants’ exceptions by its order of September 14. The order of September 25 therefore appears *471superfluous. Also, we do not understand the direction in the order of September 25 that “the rule [is] dismissed.” It does not appear from the docket that a rule ever issued. In any event, whatever the purpose and exact meaning of the order of September 25 may be, the order may not be read as a judgment, nor have appellants claimed that it may be so read.

Finally, we note that an appeal taken on October 4 would have been timely even if taken from the lower court’s order of September 14. However, the order of September 14 was not reduced to judgment and docketed either, so that such an appeal would also have been quashed.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Each of theundersigned in the capacity indicated hereby certifies that, to his knowledge,this Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 5, 2003 fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of TheWilliam Carter Company.

 

 
|   | Date:  August  19, 2003 | /s/ FREDERICK J.  ROWAN, II |   |
|--------|------------------------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|   |                         |                        |   |
|   |                         |                        |   |
|   |                         | Frederick J.  Rowan, II     |   |
|   |                         | *Chief Executive Officer*   |   |
|   |                         |                        |   |
|   |                         |
|   | Date:  August  19, 2003 | /s/ MICHAEL D.  CASEY       |   |
|   |                         |                        |   |
|   |                         |                        |   |
|   |                         | Michael D. Casey            |   |
|   |                         | *Chief Financial Officer*   |   |
|        |                              |                             |        |  |  |

 

1

----
#### § 390.286 Certificate account.

The term *certificate account* means a savings account evidenced by a certificate that must be held for a fixed or minimum term.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1


                     FIFTH AMENDMENT TO CHICO'S FAS, INC.
                      1993 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN


      WHEREAS, CHICO'S FAS, INC. (the "Company") has previously adopted the
Chico's FAS, Inc. 1993 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, a First Amendment thereto,
a Second Amendment thereto, a Third Amendment thereto and a Fourth Amendment
thereto (collectively, the "Plan"); and

      WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.4 of the Plan, the Company's Board of
Directors has retained the right to amend the Plan in certain respects without
the approval of the stockholders of the Company; and

      WHEREAS, the Company's Board of Directors deems it advisable and in the
best interests of the Company and its stockholders to amend the Plan to provide
that no stock adjustments of the type contemplated by Section 8.1 of the Plan
will result in a change in the maximum number of shares which a participant can
purchase or a change in the $125 number which appears in Section 5.3(b) and has
determined that the amendments do not require the approval of the stockholders
of this Company.

      NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan is hereby amended as
follows:

      1. The last sentence of Section 5.3(b) of the Plan is hereby amended by
deleting the current last sentence and substituting in its place the following:

            Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8.1, no stock adjustment
            referred to therein shall operate to change (i) from ten (10) the
            minimum number of shares required to be subscribed for by an
            Eligible Employee in any offering in order for such Eligible
            Employee to participate in such offering, (ii) from eight hundred
            (800) the maximum number of shares that may be subscribed for by an
            Eligible Employee in any offering, or (iii) from One Hundred Twenty
            Five Dollars ($125.00) the dollar amount used in computing the
            number of shares to which an Eligible Employee is entitled to
            subscribe in each offering.
§ 340.1 What is the statutory authority for the regulation, what are its purpose and scope, and can the FDIC have other policies on related topics? ( a ) *Authority.* The statutory authority for adopting this part is section 11(p) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act), 12 U.S.C. 1821(p). Section 11(p) was added to the FDI Act by section 20 of the Resolution Trust Corporation Completion Act (Pub. L. 103-204, 107 Stat. 2369 (1993)).
( b ) *Purpose.* The purpose of this part is to prohibit individuals or entities that improperly profited or engaged in wrongdoing at the expense of a failed institution or covered financial company, or seriously mismanaged a failed institution, from buying assets of a failed institution from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
( c ) *Scope.* ( 1 ) The restrictions of this part generally apply to sales of assets of failed institutions owned or controlled by the FDIC in any capacity.
( 2 ) The restrictions in this section apply to the sale of assets of a subsidiary of a failed institution or a bridge depository institution if the FDIC controls the terms of the sale by agreement or in its role as shareholder.
( 3 ) Unless we determine otherwise, this part does not apply to the sale of securities in connection with the investment of corporate and receivership funds pursuant to the Investment Policy for Liquidation Funds managed by the FDIC as it is in effect from time to time.
( 4 ) In the case of a sale of securities backed by a pool of assets that may include assets of failed institutions by a trust or other entity, this part applies only to the sale of assets by the FDIC to an underwriter in an initial offering, and not to any other purchaser of the securities.
( 5 ) The restrictions of this part do not apply to a sale of a security or a group or index of securities, a commodity, or any qualified financial contract that, in each case, customarily is traded through a financial intermediary, as defined in § 340.2, where the seller cannot control selection of the purchaser and the sale is consummated through that customary practice.
( 6 ) The restrictions of this part do not apply to a judicial sale or a trustee's sale of property that secures an obligation to the FDIC where the sale is not conducted or controlled by the FDIC.
( d ) The FDIC retains the authority to establish other policies restricting asset sales. Neither 12 U.S.C. 1821(p) nor this part in any way limits the authority of the FDIC to establish policies prohibiting the sale of assets to prospective purchasers who have injured any failed institution, or to other prospective purchasers, such as certain employees or contractors of the FDIC, or individuals who are not in compliance with the terms of any debt or duty owed to the FDIC. Any such policies may be independent of, in conjunction with, or in addition to the restrictions set forth in this part.
Exhibit 8.1 List of Significant Subsidiaries:  Name

Percentageof
ownership

Registered office

ActivityItalsofa Nordeste S/A

100.00

Salvador de Bahia, Brazil

(1)Natuzzi (China) Ltd.

100.00

Shanghai, China

(1)Italsofa Romania S.r.l.

100.00

Baia Mare, Romania

(1)Natco S.p.A.

99.99

Santeramo in Colle, Italy

(2)I.M.P.E. S.p.A.

100.00

Bari, Italy

(3)Nacon S.p.A.

100.00

Santeramo in Colle, Italy

(4)Lagene S.r.l.

100.00

Santeramo in Colle, Italy

(4)Natuzzi Americas Inc.

100.00

High Point, North Carolina, USA

(4)Natuzzi Iberica S.A.

100.00

Madrid, Spain

(4)Natuzzi Switzerland AG

100.00

Dietikon, Switzerland

(4)Natuzzi Germany Gmbh

100.00

Köln, Germany

(4)Natuzzi Japan KK

100.00

Tokyo, Japan

(4)Natuzzi Services Limited

100.00

London, UK

(4)Natuzzi Russia OOO

100.00

Moscow, Russia

(4)Natuzzi India Furniture PVT Ltd.

100.00

New Delhi, India

(4)Natuzzi Florida LLC

51.00

High Point, North Carolina, USA

(4)Natmex S.DE.R.L.DE.C.V

99.00

Mexico City, Mexico

(4)Natuzzi France S.a.s.

100.00

Paris, France

(4)Softaly (Furniture) Shanghai Co. Ltd.

96.50

Shanghai, China

(4)Natuzzi Netherlands Holding

100.00

Amsterdam, Holland

(5)New Comfort S.r.l.

100.00

Santeramo in Colle, Italy

(6)Italsofa Shanghai Ltd.

96.50

Shanghai, China

(6)Natuzzi Trade Service S.r.l.

100.00

Santeramo in Colle, Italy

(6)Natuzzi Oceania PTI Ltd.

100.00

Sydney, Australia

(6)  (1)
Manufacture and distribution (2)
Intragroup leather dyeing and finishing (3)
Production and distribution of polyurethane foam (4)
Services and distribution (5)
Investment holding (6)
Dormant
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT

     This Consulting Services Agreement "the Agreement," entered into this 1 day
of March , 200 0 between Roy A.  Robertson ,  "Consultant,"  and Endovasc  Ltd.,
Inc. (ENDV), "the Company."

     WHEREAS, the Company has agreed to retain the Consultant and the Consultant
has  agreed  to  provide  his/her  expertise  to the  Company  to  assist in the
development  of the  Company's  Advanced  Vascular  Diagnostics  &  Therapeutics
projects;

     THEREFORE,  the Company  has agreed to pay a fee of $ 5,000  monthly to the
Consultant payable twice monthly on the first (1st) and fifteenth (15th) of each
month.

     Expenses   shall  be  reimbursed   within  a  reasonable   time  after  the
presentation  of an  invoice  from the  Consultant  and  based on the  Company's
current expense reimbursement policy.

     The term of this  Agreement  shall be for the period of 6 months , or until
terminated by the Company or the  Consultant by giving a thirty (30) day written
notice of the Company's or Consultant's intent to cancel this Agreement.

     The  Consultant  will  be  pledged  to  the  usual   confidentialities  and
non-disclosures of information  developed that is not already known or is in the
public domain.  The Consultant  will agree not to compete with the company for a
period of three years if or when this agreement of association is terminated.

     As further  inducement  to the  Consultant  to provide  his  services,  the
Company has issued in the  Consultant's  name 25,000  shares of ENDV  restricted
common stock.  Should the company require  significant  increases in time during
the term of agreement, the parties will agree in the form and method of payment,
i.e., stock or stock and cash, etc.

     This form constitutes the entire Agreement.

/s/ Roy A. Robertson                                    /s/ David P. Summers
Consultant: Roy A. Robertson                            David P. Summers, Ph.D.
                                                        Chairman and CEO
#### § 313.128 Disposition of amounts collected.

FMS will transmit amounts collected for past-due, legally enforceable debts, less fees charged under this section, to the FDIC's account. The FDIC will reimburse FMS and the IRS for the cost of administering the tax refund offset program. FMS will deduct the fees from amounts collected prior to disposition and transmit a portion of the fees deducted to reimburse the IRS for its share of the cost of administering the tax refund offset program. To the extent allowed by law, the FDIC may add the offset fees to the debt.

[67 FR 48527, July 25, 2002. Redesignated at 71 FR 75661, Dec. 18, 2006]
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3166 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 3166

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 57 Old Tappan Road in Tappan, New York, as the ``John G. Dow Post 
                           Office Building''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3166

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 57 Old Tappan Road in Tappan, New York, as the ``John G. Dow Post 
                           Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 57 Old 
Tappan Road in Tappan, New York, shall be known and designated as the 
``John G. Dow Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``John G. Dow Post Office 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 4, 2003.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 50.109 Rules for consolidation. ( a ) *Consolidated subsidiary available stable funding amount.* For available stable funding of a legal entity that is a consolidated subsidiary of a national bank or Federal savings association, including a consolidated subsidiary organized under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, the national bank or Federal savings association may include the available stable funding of the consolidated subsidiary in its ASF amount up to: ( 1 ) The RSF amount of the consolidated subsidiary, as calculated by the national bank or Federal savings association for the national bank's or Federal savings association's net stable funding ratio under this part; plus
( 2 ) Any amount in excess of the RSF amount of the consolidated subsidiary, as calculated by the national bank or Federal savings association for the national bank's or Federal savings association's net stable funding ratio under this part, to the extent the consolidated subsidiary may transfer assets to the top-tier national bank or Federal savings association, taking into account statutory, regulatory, contractual, or supervisory restrictions, such as sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c and 12 U.S.C. 371c-1) and Regulation W (12 CFR part 223).
( b ) *Required consolidation procedures.* To the extent a national bank or Federal savings association includes an ASF amount in excess of the RSF amount of the consolidated subsidiary, the national bank or Federal savings association must implement and maintain written procedures to identify and monitor applicable statutory, regulatory, contractual, supervisory, or other restrictions on transferring assets from any of its consolidated subsidiaries. These procedures must document which types of transactions the national bank or Federal savings association could use to transfer assets from a consolidated subsidiary to the national bank or Federal savings association and how these types of transactions comply with applicable statutory, regulatory, contractual, supervisory, or other restrictions.