alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### EM ELIZA SHEAR, Respondent, *v.*THE PHŒNIX MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant.

*Inswra/nce agent—power of, to waive conditions of policy.*

A general agent of an insurance company may waive payment of the premium when due and thereby bind the company. The existence and validity of the contract being conceded; an agent may waive or disregard conditions therein without destroying its vitality. *(Bodine*v. *Exch. Fire Ins. Co.,*51 N. Y., 117; *Miller v. Phœnix Ins. Co.,*27 Iowa, 203; 1 Am. R., 262; *Carroll*v. *Charter Oak*
      *801
      *Ins. Co.,*10 Abb. [N. S.], 166; *Ins. Co.*v. *Colt,*20 Wall., 560, 568; *Owen*v. *Farmers’ Joint Stock Ins. Co.,*57 Barb., 518; *Sheldon*v. *Atlantic F. and M. Ins. Co.,*26 3 N. Y., 460; *Trustees of First Bap. Ch.*v. *Brooklyn Fire Ins. Co.,*19 id., 305; *Rowley*v. *Empire Ins. Co.,*36 N. Y., 550; *Boehen*v. *Williamsburg F. I. Co.,*35 id., 131; *Whitwell*v. *Putnam Ins. Co.,*6 Lans., 166; *Dohn v. Farmers' Joint Stock Ins. Co.,*5 id., 277.)

Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial upon the minutes.

This action was brought upon a life insurance policy issued to plaintiff upon the life of her husband. The only defense interposed was the non-payment of the semi-annual premium due and payable August 31, 1872, whereby the policy became dead and of no further force or validity.

The plaintiff gave evidence tending to show that in July, 1872, her husband saw Weller, defendant’s agent, and offered to pay the premium to become due August thirty-first thereafter; that Weller then waived such payment, saying he had not the company receipt and that he would keep him good with the company. Weller denied such conversation and waiver.

Under these facts it was left to the jury to say whether there had been a waiver of payment legally binding upon the company.

*Samuel Hand,*for the appellant.

*R. E. Andrews,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

Boardman, J.

Present — Learned, P. J., Boardman and James, JJ.

James, J., dissented.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
§ 95.025 Adoption of State blood alcohol concentration levels. ( a ) This section applies to operators of recreational vessels on waters within the geographical boundaries of any State that has established by statute a blood alcohol concentration level for purposes of determining whether a person is operating a vessel under the influence of alcohol.
( b ) If the applicable State statute establishes a blood alcohol concentration level at which a person is considered or presumed to be under the influence of alcohol, then that level applies within the geographical boundaries of that State instead of the level provided in § 95.020(a) of this part.
( c ) For the purposes of this part, a standard established by State statute and adopted under this section is applicable to the operation of any recreational vessel on waters within the geographical boundaries of the State.
[CGD 84-099, 52 FR 47532, Dec. 14, 1987, as amended by USCG-1998-4593, 66 FR 1862, Jan. 10, 2001]
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

**CONSENT OF REGISTERED INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTINGFIRM**

 

We consent to the inclusion of our report dated April 15,2008 on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of PeoplesCommunity Bancorp, Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and for the yearsended December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Peoples Community Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31,2008.

 
|                | /s/**BKD,****LLP** |
|---------------------|--------------------|
|                |               |
|                |               |
| Cincinnati, Ohio    |               |
| April 29, 2009 |               |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 113 (Monday, June 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36892-36893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14712]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-2299-000]


Consumers Energy Company; Notice of Issuance of Order

June 6, 2000.
    Consumers Energy Company (Consumers Energy) submitted for filing a 
rate schedule under which Consumers Energy will engage in wholesale 
electric power and energy transactions as a marketer. Consumers Energy 
also requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In particular, 
Consumers Energy requested that the Commission grant blanket approval 
under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities and 
assumptions of liability by Consumers Energy.
    On June 1, 2000, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Corporate Applications, Office of Markets, Tariffs and 
Rates, granted requests for blanket approval under part 34, subject to 
the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by Consumers Energy should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 
and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, Consumers Energy 
is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities 
as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any 
security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption 
is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Consumers 
Energy, and compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably 
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.

[[Page 36893]]

    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of Consumers Energy's issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is July 3, 2000.
    Copies of the full text of the Order are available from the 
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, 
DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Lindwood A. Watson, Jr.
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-14712 Filed 6-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of International
Star, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Sterling M. Redfern, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
knowledge, that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. § 78m or 78o(d));
      and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




Date:  March
      31, 2009
                /s/ Sterling
      M. RedfernSterling M.
      RedfernPresident
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5068 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5068

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 5927 Southwest 70th Street in Miami, Florida, as the ``Marjory 
                    Williams Scrivens Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2000

   Mrs. Meek of Florida (for herself, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Ms. Brown of 
Florida, Mrs. Fowler, Mr. Weldon of Florida, Mr. Diaz-Balart, Mr. Goss, 
and Mr. Shaw) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 5927 Southwest 70th Street in Miami, Florida, as the ``Marjory 
                    Williams Scrivens Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. MARJORY WILLIAMS SCRIVENS POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 5927 Southwest 70th Street in Miami, Florida, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Marjory Williams Scrivens Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Marjory 
Williams Scrivens Post Office.
                                 <all>
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.750 Schellenger Creek.

The draw of the Cape May County bridge, mile 0.3 at Cape May, need not be opened for the passage of vessels.

[CGD 82-025, 49 FR 43462, Oct. 29, 1984]
§ 45.1 Enlistment of personnel. ( a ) The Coast Guard is a military service which operates within the Department of Homeland Security. All personnel enlisted in the Coast Guard are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
( b ) Any person desiring to enlist in the Coast Guard should apply at a Coast Guard Recruiting Office, or direct inquiries to, Coast Guard Recruiting Center, 4200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 450, Arlington, VA 22203. Enlistments in the Coast Guard shall be for general service and enlisted persons may be transferred as necessary from one unit to another. Original enlistments will be made only at regular recruiting offices unless otherwise directed by the Commandant. An original enlistment is the enlistment of an individual who has not had previous service in the Regular Coast Guard. In processing an application for enlistment, the Coast Guard will determine the mental, moral and physical fitness of the applicant through reference to local police files, character references, employers, school authorities and physical and mental examinations. Concealment of any fact, circumstance or condition existing prior to enlistment which would render the applicant ineligible for enlistment may subject the applicant to criminal penalties under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and/or administrative separation from the Coast Guard.
[CGD 82-087, 50 FR 13318, Apr. 4, 1985, as amended by CGD 96-026, 61 FR 33663, June 28, 1996; USCG-2003-14505, 68 FR 9535, Feb. 28, 2003]
writ_ex43.htm


EXHIBIT 4.3


 


 





 




  





1











  






 





 




  





2











  






 





 


 


3
<PAGE>

                                  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 on Form 10-Q of American Express Credit
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Walker C. Tompkins, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, 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/ Walker C. Tompkins, Jr.
-----------------------------------
Name:  Walker C. Tompkins, Jr.
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:  August 14, 2003

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, and is not being "filed" as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate
disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), or otherwise subject to liability under
that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act except to the extent that this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and
specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

A signed original of this written 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 or its staff upon request.
----

| Name      of Subsidiary                  |   | Jurisdiction      of Incorporation |   | Names      Under Which theSubsidiary      Conducts Business |
|------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| Qwik      Track, Inc. (1)                | Nevada | --                                 |
| Star-Resolve      Detrital Wash, LLC (2) | Nevada | --                                 |

| _______________________________ |
|---------------------------------|

| (1)   | We      own a 100% interest in Qwik Track, Inc.  Qwik Track, Inc. is not      currently an active business entity.  We do not have plans as of      the date of this filing to reactivate this  subsidiary. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2)   | We      have a 50% membership interest in Star-Resolve Detrital Wash,      LLC.  Star-Resolve Detrital Wash, LLC is not currently an active      business entity.  We do not have plans as of the date of this      filing to seek reactivation of thissubsidiary. |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 1 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 2 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 3 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 4 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 5 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 6 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 7 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 8 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 9 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 10 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 11 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 12 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 13 of 14
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT A

Case 0:22-cv-61588-WPD Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 14 of 14
Exhibit 12.01



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002



I, Mike Alexander, the chief executive officer of British Energy plc certify that to the best of my knowledge (i) the Form 20-F fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of British Energy plc.





|       | 
|------ | 
|       | 
|       | 
|Name:  | 
|Title: | 





|Date: |  | September 23, 2003
|----- |  | ------------------



---

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002



I, Keith Lough, the finance director of British Energy plc, certify that to the best of
my knowledge (i) the Form 20-F fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of British Energy plc.





|       | 
|------ | 
|       | 
|       | 
|Name:  | 
|Title: | 





|Date: |  | September 23, 2003
|----- |  | ------------------
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-91064) and Registration Statement (Form S-8/S-3 No. 333-56762) pertaining to the 1999 Stock Plan, 2000 Stock Plan, 2000 Incentive Stock Plan and 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Opsware Inc. (formerlyLoudcloud, Inc.), of our report dated February 21, 2003 (except for Note 14, as to which the date is April 9, 2003), with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Opsware Inc., included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) forthe year ended January 31, 2003, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

 

/s/    ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

 

San Jose, California 

April 30, 2003
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Thomas A. WALSH, Jr., and Marjorie C. Walsh.

No. 16099.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

Oct. 20, 1958.

William C. Spire, U. S. Atty., and Robert H. Berkshire, Asst. U. S. Atty., Omaha, Neb., for appellant.

Robert D. Mullin, Omaha, Neb., for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court, 163 F.Supp. 421, dismissed, on dismissal of appeal filed by appellant.
###### Editorial Note on Part 157

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 157 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

#### § 157.14 Pump-room bottom protection.

Each oil tanker of 5,000 tons deadweight or more constructed on or after January 1, 2007, must meet the minimum standard of pump room bottom protection required by Annex I, Regulation 22 (incorporated by reference, see § 157.02).

[USCG-2010-0194, 80 FR 5938, Feb. 4, 2015]
#### § 88.01 Purpose and applicability.

This part applies to all vessels operating on United States inland waters and to United States vessels operating on the Canadian waters of the Great Lakes to the extent there is no conflict with Canadian law.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA

No. 24 / 07-0414

Filed February 1, 2008

CHRISTOPHER TEGGATZ and TANYA TEGGATZ , Appellants,

vs. SATTLER HOMES, INC. , Appellee.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.

Third-party purchasers of home appeal from summary judgment for builder in suit for breach of implied warranty of workmanlike

construction. DECISION OF DISTRICT COURT REVERSED AND CASE

REMANDED.

Webb L. Wassmer of Simmons, Perrine PLC, Cedar Rapids, for appellants.

James P. Craig and Mark J. Parmenter of Lederer, Weston, Craig, PLC, Cedar Rapids, for appellee.2

PER CURIAM. Plaintiffs, Christopher and Tanya Teggatz, appeal a district court order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant, Sattler Homes, Inc., on the plaintiffs’ third-party-purchaser action for breach of implied warranty of workmanlike construction against the homebuilder. The district court granted Sattler Homes’ motion for summary judgment, finding Iowa law does not extend the implied warranty of workmanlike construction to a subsequent home purchaser. Today, we vacated a court of appeals decision and reversed the judgment of the district court in an action based upon an identical claim. See Speight v. Walters Dev.

Co. , ___ N.W.2d ___ (Iowa 2008) (filed today). We held in Speight that “subsequent purchasers may recover for breach of implied warranty of workmanlike construction against a builder-vendor as recognized in Kirk [ v. Ridgway, 373 N.W.2d 491 (Iowa 1985)] for first-party purchasers.” Id. at ___. Our ruling in Speight controls here. We therefore reverse the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the defendant homebuilder and remand for further proceedings.

DECISION OF DISTRICT COURT REVERSED AND CASE

REMANDED. This opinion shall not be published.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40995

Conference Calendar

 

AUGUSTUS C. WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JANIE COCKRELL,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:02-CV-18

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

December 11, 2002

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Augustus Williams, Texas inmate #615597, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. 

Williams alleged in the district court that he did not receive

certain inmate trust fund account statements and that money was

taken from his inmate trust fund account without his consent.

Williams’s appellate brief is devoted to arguing the merits

of his complaint and does not argue adequately that the district
No. 02-40995

-2-

court erred in dismissing his complaint. Williams’s appellate

brief does not challenge the reasons for the district court’s

dismissal of his complaint. Williams has waived the only issues

for appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(A); Brinkmann v. Dallas

County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

This appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. 

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). It is

therefore DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

The dismissal of this appeal counts as a strike under the

Prison Litigation Reform Act. Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383,

387 (5th Cir. 1996). Williams is WARNED that if he accumulates

three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) he will not be able to

proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed

while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). 

APPEAL DISMISSED, SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
§ 80.755 Anclote, FL to the Suncoast Keys, FL. ( a ) Except inside lines specifically described in this section, the 72 COLREGS shall apply on the bays, bayous, creeks, marinas, and rivers from Anclote to the Suncoast Keys.
( b ) A north-south line drawn at longitude 82°38.3′ W. across the Chassahowitzka River Entrance.