alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 1926
Editorial Notes: 1. At 44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of 29 CFR part 1926 together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in 29 CFR part 1910, which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at 84 FR 21597, May 14, 2019.

§ 1926.752 Site layout, site-specific erection plan and construction sequence. ( a ) *Approval to begin steel erection.* Before authorizing the commencement of steel erection, the controlling contractor shall ensure that the steel erector is provided with the following written notifications: ( 1 ) The concrete in the footings, piers and walls and the mortar in the masonry piers and walls has attained, on the basis of an appropriate ASTM standard test method of field-cured samples, either 75 percent of the intended minimum compressive design strength or sufficient strength to support the loads imposed during steel erection.
( 2 ) Any repairs, replacements and modifications to the anchor bolts were conducted in accordance with § 1926.755(b).
( b ) *Commencement of steel erection.* A steel erection contractor shall not erect steel unless it has received written notification that the concrete in the footings, piers and walls or the mortar in the masonry piers and walls has attained, on the basis of an appropriate ASTM standard test method of field-cured samples, either 75 percent of the intended minimum compressive design strength or sufficient strength to support the loads imposed during steel erection.
( c ) *Site layout.* The controlling contractor shall ensure that the following is provided and maintained: ( 1 ) Adequate access roads into and through the site for the safe delivery and movement of derricks, cranes, trucks, other necessary equipment, and the material to be erected and means and methods for pedestrian and vehicular control. Exception: this requirement does not apply to roads outside of the construction site.
( 2 ) A firm, properly graded, drained area, readily accessible to the work with adequate space for the safe storage of materials and the safe operation of the erector's equipment.
( d ) *Pre-planning of overhead hoisting operations.* All hoisting operations in steel erection shall be pre-planned to ensure that the requirements of § 1926.753(d) are met.
( e ) *Site-specific erection plan.* Where employers elect, due to conditions specific to the site, to develop alternate means and methods that provide employee protection in accordance with § 1926.753(c)(5), § 1926.757(a)(4) or § 1926.757(e)(4), a site-specific erection plan shall be developed by a qualified person and be available at the work site. Guidelines for establishing a site-specific erection plan are contained in appendix A to this subpart.
================================================================================

EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and
Investor Protection Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as adopted), I, Dianne
Hatton-Ward, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifiy that, to the best of her knowledge:

         1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
June 30, 2006, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.1 (the
"PERIODIC REPORT") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated: August 4, 2006


S/ Dianne Hatton-Ward
-------------------------------
Dianne Hatton-Ward
CEO & CFO

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Yummies, Inc. and will be retained by Yummies, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request

 THIS CERTIFICATION   ACCOMPANIES  THIS  REPORT  PURSUANT  TO  SS.  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.








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial Note on Part 1926
Editorial Notes: 1. At 44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of 29 CFR part 1926 together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in 29 CFR part 1910, which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at 84 FR 21597, May 14, 2019.

§ 1926.21 Safety training and education. ( a ) *General requirements.* The Secretary shall, pursuant to section 107(f) of the Act, establish and supervise programs for the education and training of employers and employees in the recognition, avoidance and prevention of unsafe conditions in employments covered by the act.
( b ) *Employer responsibility.* ( 1 ) The employer should avail himself of the safety and health training programs the Secretary provides.
( 2 ) The employer shall instruct each employee in the recognition and avoidance of unsafe conditions and the regulations applicable to his work environment to control or eliminate any hazards or other exposure to illness or injury.
( 3 ) Employees required to handle or use poisons, caustics, and other harmful substances shall be instructed regarding the safe handling and use, and be made aware of the potential hazards, personal hygiene, and personal protective measures required.
( 4 ) In job site areas where harmful plants or animals are present, employees who may be exposed shall be instructed regarding the potential hazards, and how to avoid injury, and the first aid procedures to be used in the event of injury.
( 5 ) Employees required to handle or use flammable liquids, gases, or toxic materials shall be instructed in the safe handling and use of these materials and made aware of the specific requirements contained in subparts D, F, and other applicable subparts of this part.
[44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979; 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979, as amended at 80 FR 25518, May 4, 2015]
§ 414.45 Administrative law judge's recommended decision in safety element approval actions. ( a ) The Associate Administrator, who will make the final decision on the matter at issue, will review the recommended decision of the administrative law judge. The Associate Administrator will make such final decision within 30 days of issuance of the recommended decision.
( b ) The authority and responsibility to review and decide rests solely with the Associate Administrator and may not be delegated.
[Nos. 20514-2-III; 20515-1-III.

Division Three.

November 5, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Kenneth Michael Stratton, *Appellant.*

Appeals from judgments of the Superior Court for Yakima County, Nos. 00-1-00844-4 and 00-1-00513-5, Heather K. Van Nuys, J., entered August 23, 2001. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Kato, A.C.J., concurred in by Sweeney and Schultheis, JJ.
#### § 1902.35 Effect of certification.

Publication of the certification acknowledging the completion of all of the developmental steps in a State's plan will automatically initiate the evaluation of a State's plan for the purposes of an 18(e) determination. Evaluation for the purposes of an 18(e) determination will continue for at least one year after the publication of the certification in the Federal Register. Federal enforcement authority under sections 5(a)(2), 8, 9, 10, 11(c), 13, and 17 of the Act and Federal standards authority under section 6 of the Act will not be relinquished during the evaluation period. Evaluation conducted for 18(e) determination purposes will be based on the criteria set forth in §§ 1902.37 and 1902.38.
#### § 33.37 Ignition system.

Each spark ignition engine must have a dual ignition system with at least two spark plugs for each cylinder and two separate electric circuits with separate sources of electrical energy, or have an ignition system of equivalent in-flight reliability.
Exhibit 32  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  Elgrande International, Inc.(the "Company") On  Form  10-QSB  for  the period  ended  November 30, 2006 as  filed  with the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on  the  date  hereof  (the "Report"),  I, Michael F. Holloran, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial 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  to the  best  of my knowledge: (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/ Michael F. Holloran Michael F. Holloran Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer  April 11, 2007         1
#### § 1915.1025 Lead.

Note:

The requirements applicable to shipyard employment under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1025 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1025).

[[61 FR 31431](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31431), June 20, 1996]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 26, 2016

t0718 

# Order

Clerk July 26, 2016

150581 & (16)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 150581

COA: 323978

Ionia CC: 2013

- 015838

- FC

WILLIAM CARL KILBURN, 2012

- 015596

- FC

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to add issue and additional file number is

GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the November 12, 2014 order of the

Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting

leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Ionia Circuit Court to determine whether

the court would have imposed a materially different se ntence under the sentencing

procedure described in People v Lockridge , 498 Mich 358 (2015). On remand, the trial

court shall follow the procedure described in Part VI of our opinion. If the trial court

determines that it would have imposed the same sente nce absent the unconstitutional

constraint on its discretion, it may reaffirm the original sentence. If, however, the trial

court determines that it would not have imposed the same sentence absent the

unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it shal l resentence the defendant. In addition,

we VACATE the trial court’s November 21, 2014 order reinstating costs. The court did

not have authority to sua sponte enter the order because the correction was not a clerical

error under MCR 6.435(A), the judgmen t of sentence was not invalid within the meaning

of MCR 6.429(A), and the amended version of MCL 769.1k does not apply to the court’s

amended judgment of sentence issued September 29, 2014.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 23


                      REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors
of Kellwood Company

         Our audits of the consolidated financial statements referred to in
our report dated March 7, 2001 which appears in the 2000 Annual Report to
Shareholders of Kellwood Company (which report and consolidated financial
statements are incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K)
also included an audit of the financial statement schedule listed in Item
14(a)(2) of this Form 10-K. In our opinion, this financial statement
schedule presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set
forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated
financial statements.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
March 7, 2001



                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

         We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 033-64847) of Kellwood Company of
our report dated March 7, 2001 relating to the financial statements which
appear in the Annual Report to Shareholders which is incorporated in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated March 7, 2001 relating to the financial
statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
April 23, 2001
##### 



EXHIBIT 32
 
  (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/
David V. Singer
    

/s/
Rick D. PuckettDavid V. Singer
    
    Rick D. PuckettPresident and Chief Executive Officer
    
    Executive Vice President, Chief FinancialMarch 8, 2007
    
    Officer, Treasurer and SecretaryMarch 8, 2007
Exhibit 99.1


                    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 AEI Income  &  Growth
Fund  23 LLC (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended
March  31,  2003, as filed with the Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  on  the  date  hereof (the "Report"),  I,  Robert  P.
Johnson, President of AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc., the Managing
Member  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/ Robert P Johnson
                                Robert P. Johnson, President
                                AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc.
                                Managing Member
                                May 12, 2003
#### § 1912.29 Attendance by members.

Any person appointed by the Assistant Secretary to an advisory committee has a right to be present at any duly called meeting. If any person representing the interests of employers, employees, or the States is unable to be present at a duly called meeting, he may notify the Assistant Secretary or his designee, and request that another member of the Committee representing the same interests be permitted to vote in his place on any matters coming before the advisory committee in the particular meeting. The request may be oral or in writing, and shall be accompanied by a statement of reasons for the anticipated absence. The Assistant Secretary or his designee shall grant the request whenever he is convinced that the reasons for absence are valid and that number of requested proxies for any particular meeting will not be so numerous as to impede materially the deliberations of the advisory committee.
#### § 1614.607 Delegation of authority.

An agency head may delegate authority under this part, to one or more designees.
#### Pietruszka v. Sobek

*330
      *S. Thaddeus Kwiat,*for plaintiffs.

*John M. McLaughlin,*for defendant.

May 2, 1958.

Evans, P. J.,

This matter is before the court on a motion for a protective order in connection with a notice of taking depositions on oral examination under Pa. R. C. P. 4007.

It is represented that Irene Pietruszka is the six-year-old minor daughter of John Pietruszka, and that she was injured by coming in contact with an automobile owned and being driven by defendant. Defendant represents that he saw the child and had passed her on the street without striking her, and is unaware that the child was struck by his automobile. He seeks the right to obtain information as to circumstances concerning contact for purposes of trial.

We feel that an inquiry is justified, but that an oral examination should not be permitted. A six-year-old child is a difficult witness at best, and it is entirely possible that a rigid cross-examination might cause her so much terror that she would be unwilling to appear in her own behalf at the trial to be subsequently held. For that reason, we will permit inquiry only in the form of written interrogatories at a time and place to be reasonably fixed for the convenience of the parties.

And now, to wit, May 2, 1958, it is ordered and decreed that written interrogatories may be submitted to Irene Pietruszka and John Pietruszka. The motion for oral examination is denied.
|   | EXHIBIT      13.1 |
|--------|-------------------|

|   | CHIEF      EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|

|   | PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|

|   | In      connection with this annual report of Ultrapetrol (Bahamas) Limited (the      “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2008, as filed      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the      “Report”), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350  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. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | This      certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,      and not for any other purpose. |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:  March      17, 2009 |
|---------------------------------------|

| /s/      Felipe Menendez Ross  |
|--------------------------------|
| Felipe      Menendez Ross      |
|                           |
| Director,      Chief Executive |
| Officer,      and President    |
#### Louise M. Kernochan, as Administratrix, *v.*Angelins A. Murray, as Executrix, etc., *et al.*

*(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,*

*Filed May 24, 1889.)*

Guaranty—Duration.

A guaranty, by la vendor of stock, that the vendee shall receive certain dividends thereon |so long as he holds the stock, which does not terminate on the death of the guarantor, may be enforced by the personal representatives of the vendee after the latter’s death.

Case agreed upon in a controversy without action.

*J. Frederick Kernochan,*for pl’ff; *Sidney V. Lovell,*for def’t.

Van Brunt, P. J.

In view of the decision of the court of appeals in *Kernochan*v. *Murray*(111 N. Y., 306; 19 N. Y. State Rep., 491), construing the instrument upon which this actión was brought, there remains but one question to be determined upon the trial of this case, and that is, did the personal representatives of John A, Kernochan,! upon his death, acquire any rights by virtue of this agreement, he not having ever parted with the stock jin question ? The court of appeals have already held than this guaranty had no personal quality; that it was an ¡original and not a collateral undertaking, and that although it read “ I do hereby guaranty,” etc., the personal representatives of the guarantor were bound.

Applying the same principle of construction, if the guarantee was npt terminated by the death of the guarantor, neither would it terminate upon the death of the person to whom the guarahtee ran.

It is true tho| it guaranteed him as long as he held the stock, but this clearly meant as long as the stock was not parted with, and the devolution of the stock by operation of law was in njo sense a parting with the stock, such as was contemplated by the agreement. .As the court of appeals say in the case cited, the guaranty protected the purchaser while his interest should continue; in other words, until he Voluntarily parted with his interest. Upon his death, it is true, he parted with the stock, but it cannot be assumed that1 he voluntarily did so, and his interest devolved, by law, upon his personal representative, and she stood in precisely the same relation to the contract as the deceased. |

*685The claims made by the defendant that the guaranty was merely personal, and that the guarantor was a surety, seem to have been determined adversely to him in the case cited. The plaintiff is entitled to judgment, with costs.

Daniels and Brady, JJ., concur.