alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_______________________________________ __ ___________________ ___________________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 5, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly 133098 (68)(70)(71) Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman,
Justices JAN KAY ESTES, Persona l Representative of the Estate of Douglas Duane Estes, Plaintiff-Appellee, SC: 133098 v COA: 261968 Kalamazoo CC: 02-000529-NZ JEFF EDWARD TITUS, Defendant-Appellee, and

JULIE L. SWABASH, f/k/a JULIE L. TITUS, Appellant.

On order of the Chief Justice, motions by the Business Law and Family Law
Sections of the State Bar of Mich igan for leave to file briefs amicus curiae are considered and they are GRANTED. The motion by the Business Law Section for leave to participate in oral argument is DENIED.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 5, 2007

Clerk
Certification of Principal Executive Officer
     Pursuant  to  18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of  the  Sarbanes-
     Oxley Act of 2002)

     I,  Raynerd B. Carson, President and Chief Executive Officer
     of   World  Ventures  Inc.,  certify,  to  the  best  of  my
     knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual report on  Form
     20-F for the period ended October 31, 2003 of World Ventures
     Inc. that:

     (1)  The  Annual report on Form 20-F fully complies with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
          1934, as amended; and


     (2)  The information contained and incorporated by reference in
          the Annual report on Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
          World Ventures Inc.

     /s/ Raynerd B. Carson
     ---------------------
     Raynerd B. Carson
     President (Chief Executive Officer)
     April 16, 2004


     A  SIGNED  ORIGINAL  OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT  REQUIRED  BY
     SECTION  906  HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO WORLD VENTURES  INC.  AND
     WILL BE RETAINED BY WORLD VENTURES INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE
     SECURITIES  AND  EXCHANGE  COMMISSION  OR  ITS  STAFF   UPON
     REQUEST.
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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 27,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the 10-Q Report), that:



| | (1) | the 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The undersigned have executed this Certification effective as November 12, 2008.



/s/ Cathy B. TaylorCathy B. TaylorPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ P. Douglas FordP. Douglas FordChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this Certification has been provided to Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. and will be
retained by Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Albert POAREO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gary JOHNSON, Governor, State of New Mexico; and Robert Perry, Secretary of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-2136.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Aug. 29, 2002.

Albert Poareo, Western NM Correctional Facility, Grants, NM, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Before KELLY, McKAY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

McKAY, Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

This is a pro se state prisoner § 1983 civil rights appeal claiming that certain New Mexico statutes are unconstitutional and that certain programs and actions of the New Mexico Corrections Department constitute Eighth Amendment violations. Mr. Poareo sought equitable relief and nominal damages. The district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Mr. Poareo appeals to this court.

*457We agree with the district court that Appellant “may not prosecute his claims in this Court unless and until he exhausts administrative remedies.” Order at 2. After a thorough review of the brief and the record and for substantially the same reasons set forth in the district court’s well-reasoned April 22, 2002, Order, we hold that no relief is available to Mr. Poareo pursuant to § 1983.

The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED. We remind Appellant that because his motion to proceed without prepayment of the appellate filing fee was granted, he must continue making partial payments on court fees and costs previously assessed until such have been paid in full.

*

This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
# CIT YO FTUPEL O IAC K REED , 1R. , MAYO R

## i^WiTMcNTO F 

# •mm s Februar y22 , 201 2 'H i K: u 2 2 P 3 : I 8
Mr . Denni s DeVan y Chief , EA S & Domesti cAnalysi s Divisio n Offic e o fAviatio n Departmen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue , S.E . Washington , D C 2059 0 RE : Tupel o Regiona l Airpor t (TUP ) Docke t DOTOST-2009-030 5 Dea rMr . DeVany : W e hav e reviewe d EA S proposal s submitte d unde rDocke t DOT-OST-2009-0305 . W e hav e determine d tha t SeaPor t Airline s Inc . an d Multi-Aer o Inc. , db a Ai rChoic e On e fo r Tupelo , Mississipp i d o no t mee t th e statutor yrequirement s o fa twin-engin e aircraft . W e hav e als o determine d tha t Citizen s Capita l cor . db a Blu e Sk yAiriine s an d Su n Ai r Internationa l d o no t hav e operatin g certificates . Furthermore , th e leve l o fservic e wil l b e a grea t disadvantag e t o an yairlin e an d ou rairpor t withou t suppor t fro m Delt a Airlines , throug h codeshar e an d join t ticke t pricing , allowin g passenger s t o easil yflo wthroug h th e nationa l airport s system . W e appreciat e th e interes t o fthes e airlines , bu t d o no t endors e o rsuppor t thes e proposal s fo rsubsidize d essentia l ai rservic e t o th e communitie s o fTupelo , MS . W e woul d lik e t o than k

yo u fo ryou rcooperatio n an d assistanc e i n thi s matter . Respectfully , CIT YO F TUPEL O '^Jac k Ree d Jr . Mayo r JRJ/se w

7 1 i AS TIKO Y SIR It I• POS TOFI-lCi : BO XMHS rill'l. l () , MISSIS.SIPP I38«() 2 I4K 5 ri:i.i:pnoNi , ()( 0 s n65(» 9 • I'A XM-<IX4( » ?.()7 1
#### Hope GIBSON, by her father and next friend, Robert J. Gibson, Appellant, v. Ben C. STOREY, M. D., Appellee.

No. 75-2156.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 26, 1976.

Harvey J. Garod, Law Offices of T. G. LaGrone, Orlando, for appellant.

Edna L. Caruso of Howell, Kirby, Montgomery, D’Aiuto & Dean, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED upon authority of *Carter v. Sparkman,*335 So.2d 802 (Fla.1976).

MAGER, C. J., DOWNEY, J., and STEWART, JAMES R., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Document

Exhibit 10.2
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED
2005 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN
OF
THE CLOROX COMPANY


This AMENDMENT NO. 1 to the Third Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) of The Clorox Company (the “Company”) was approved by the Management Development and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company, effective as of September 21, 2021.


Pursuant to this amendment, Section 14(b) of the Plan shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the below:


Unless otherwise determined by the Committee and reflected in the terms of an Award at the time of grant, measurement of performance goals with respect to the Performance Measures above shall exclude the impact of charges for restructurings, discontinued operations, extraordinary items, other unusual or non-recurring items and the cumulative effects of tax or accounting changes, each as determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles or identified in the Company’s financial statements, notes to the financial statements, management’s discussion and analysis or other filings with the SEC or as otherwise based on the Company’s accounting as set forth in its books and records (including business projections) and/or in the annual budgets and/or long range plans of the Company pursuant to which such performance goals were established.
G:\IMF Office Files\Operational Issues_IMF\IMF Routine Votes\3Q-REPORT 11.Docx November 28, 2011 (12:26 PM)

Quarterly Report to Congress on International Monetary Fund Lending

July 1 – September 30, 2011

Board 

Approval Date Country Amount Type U.S. 

Position

Background

07/08/2011 Côte d’Ivoire SDR 81.3 million 

($129.2 million)

RCF Support http://www.imf.org/external/np/

sec/pr/2011/pr11272.htm

07/13/2011 Burundi SDR 5.0 million

($7.92 million)

ECF Augmentation Support http://www.imf.org/external/np/

sec/pr/2011/pr11280.htm

07/25/2011 St. Vincent and the 

Grenadines

SDR 1.245 million 

($2.0 million)

RCF Support http://www.imf.org/external/np/

sec/pr/2011/pr11293.htm

07/27/2011 St. Kitts and Nevis SDR 52.51 million 

($84.5 million)

SBA Support http://www.imf.org/external/np/

sec/pr/2011/pr11295.htm

09/29/2011 Republic of Serbia SDR 935.4 million 

($1.5 billion or 

€1.1 billion)

SBA Support http://www.imf.org/external/np/

sec/pr/2011/pr11353.htm
#### DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION et al., Appellants, v. Henry Carl VANDERVOORT, Jr., Individually and as President of the Florida Division of the Horseman’s Benevolent & Protective Association, a non-profit corporation, and all other licensed thoroughbred owners similarly situated, Appellees.

No. 40275.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 20, 1972.

Rehearing Denied March 7, 1973.

*67Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Bruce L. Scheiner, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Herbert M. Klein, Gen. Counsel, Dept, of Business Regulation, Miami, for appellants.

Dan Chappell and Richard M. Gale, Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The Department of Business Regulation has appealed from a decision of the Dade County Circuit Court that Rule 305 A-1.23 (17) promulgated by the Division of PariMutuel Wagering is unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction because of the Court’s construction of controlling provisions of the Constitutions of Florida and the United States. Article V, § 4(2), Florida Constitution, F.S.A.

Rule 305 A-1.23 (17) of the Rules of the Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering set forth a minimum jockey fee schedule for payment of jockeys in absence of contract. In a declaratory judgment proceeding initiated by Vandervoort and other licensed thoroughbred horse owners, the Division defended the Rule on the two-fold theory that: (1) the State’s inherent police power appropriately embraced the profession of jockeying; (2) the Division was authorized to exercise that power in the manner under contest by Fla.Stat. §§ 550.01(1) and 550.02(4), F.S.A.

We agree with the trial court and the plaintiff horseowners below that the Legislature has not specifically authorized the setting of fees, and this is too broad a power to be derived from the general statutes cited. The Due Process Clauses of Article I, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A. and the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution preclude the prescribing of minimum wages without specific legislative authorization.

On this ground, the decision, under appeal is affirmed.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS and McCAIN, JJ-, and SPECTOR, District Court Judge, concur.

ERVIN and DEKLE, JJ., dissent.
Order entered October 24, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00556-CR

JASON ALLEN SKINNER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F12-00955-M

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant 

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any 

other reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If 

the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall 

make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next 

determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs 

for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the 

trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial 

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective 

representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds 

appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the 

appeal.
 The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who 

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay 

in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can 

be filed. 

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact, 

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date 

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal 

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, 

whichever is earlier.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit 10.16
 COMARCO INC.
 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY
 EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 2009
 CASH COMPENSATION
 Annual Retainers for Serving as Chairpersons
 Chairman of the Board
 Committee Chairpersons
 
    
    $6,000    Audit Committee
    
    $5,000    Compensation Committee
    
    $5,000    Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
    
    $5,000    Any other standing committee of the Board
 Additional Annual Retainers
 Retainer for Serving on the Board
 Retainer for Serving on Committees.
 Board/Committee Meeting Fees
  Adjustments
  EQUITY-BASED COMPENSATION
  TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
  AMENDMENTS, REVISION AND TERMINATION
#### TRAVEL SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Robert A. KASKY et al., Appellees.

No. 77-365.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 21, 1978.

Mac Mermell and Marc A. Kuperman, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Frates, Floyd, Pearson, Stewart, Richman & Greer and Kenneth J. Weil and Bruce A. Christensen, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Pickard v. Maritime Holdings Corp.,*161 So.2d 239, 241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

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.

 April 5, 2019

t0329

Order 

Clerk

April 5, 2019

157667 & (47)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant/

Cross-Appellee,

v SC: 157667

COA: 336550

Kent CC: 93-064278-FC

GREGORY WINES,

Defendant-Appellee/

Cross-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 8, 2018 

judgment of the Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as crossappellant are considered and, it appearing to this Court that the case of People v Turner

(Docket No. 158068) is pending on appeal before this Court and that the decision in that 

case may resolve an issue raised in the present applications for leave to appeal, we 

ORDER that the applications be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in that case.
#### Emilia ROMAGOSA, Elena Fernandez, Bertha Niven and Belina Stabinski, Appellants, v. PENNSYLVANIA NATIONAL MUTUAL CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 69-951.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 9, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1966 

To require executive agencies to reduce cost-sharing requirements for certain 

grants with certain nonprofit organizations, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2021 

Miss GONZA ́LEZ-COLO ́N (for herself, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ, and Mrs. RADEWAGEN) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To require executive agencies to reduce cost-sharing requirements for certain grants with certain nonprofit organizations, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Empowering Non5 profits Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REMOVAL AND REDUCTION OF COST-SHARING RE7 QUIREMENTS FOR GRANTS. 

8 (a) REMOVAL OF COST-SHARING REQUIREMENT

9 DURING THE COVID–19 EMERGENCY PERIOD.—Any 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1966 IH

1 cost-sharing requirement for an eligible nonprofit organi2 zation for grants made directly to that organization by an 

3 executive agency shall be waived during a COVID–19 

4 emergency period. 

5 (b) REDUCTION OF COST-SHARING REQUIRE6 MENT.—Beginning on the expiration of the COVID–19 

7 emergency period and ending 5 years thereafter, the head 

8 of an executive agency shall reduce any cost-sharing re9 quirement 25 percent for an eligible nonprofit organiza10 tion for grants made directly to that organization. 

11 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

12 (1) COVID–19 EMERGENCY PERIOD.—The 

13 term ‘‘COVID–19 emergency period’’ means a pe14 riod that— 

15 (A) begins on the date of a determination 

16 by the Secretary of Health and Human Services 

17 pursuant to section 319 of the Public Health 

18 Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d) that a public 

19 health emergency exists as a result of COVID– 

20 19; and 

21 (B) ends on the date on which such deter22 mination (including any renewal thereof) termi23 nates. 

24 (2) ELIGIBLE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—The 

25 term ‘‘eligible nonprofit organization’’ means a nonVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:07 May 12, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1966.IH H1966

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1966 IH

1 profit organization that is located in a State with 

2 more than 20 percent of individuals living below the 

3 Federal poverty line. 

4 (3) EXECUTIVE AGENCY.—The term ‘‘executive 

5 agency’’ has the meaning given in section 133 of 

6 title 41, United States Code. 

7 (4) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—The term 

8 ‘‘nonprofit organization’’ means an organization that 

9 is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Rev10 enue Code of 1968 and exempt from taxation under 

11 section 501(a) of such Code. 

12 (5) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means each of 

13 the several States, the District of Columbia, each 

14 commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United 

15 States, and each federally recognized Tribe. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### George P. WASHINGTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1123.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 27, 1973.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kimler, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of Cole v. State, Fla.App.1972, 262 So.2d 902; Chavigny v. State, Fla.App.1959, 112 So.2d 910; Infante v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 542.
#### Jose RIPOLL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PROFESSIONS BOARD OF PHARMACY, Respondent.

No. 44054.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 11, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 279 So.2d 103.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
TBAC RECOMMENDED US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 1st QUARTER 2021*

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

NEW

MONEY

Net BILLS Issuance for the quarter -421.80

SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT** MONEY

COUPONS

CHANGE^

3-Year Note 1/15 58.00 2.00

10-Year Note (r) 1/15 38.00 3.00

30-Year Bond (r) 1/15 24.00 1.00 56.40 63.60

10-Year TIPS 1/29 15.00 1.00 0.00 15.00

20-Year Bond (r) 2/1 24.00 2.00

2-Year Note 2/1 60.00 2.00

5-Year Note 2/1 61.00 2.00

2-Year FRN 2/1 28.00 2.00

7-Year Note 2/1 62.00 3.00 128.87 106.13

3-Year Note 2/16 58.00 0.00

10-Year Note 2/16 41.00 0.00

30-Year Bond 2/16 27.00 0.00 62.86 63.14

30-Year TIPS 2/26 9.00 1.00

2-Year FRN (r) 2/26 26.00 2.00 0.00 35.00

20-Year Bond 3/1 27.00 0.00

2-Year Note 3/1 60.00 0.00

5-Year Note 3/1 61.00 0.00

7-Year Note 3/1 62.00 0.00 70.91 139.09

3-Year Note 3/15 58.00 0.00

10-Year Note (r) 3/15 38.00 0.00

30-Year Bond (r) 3/15 24.00 0.00 20.56 99.44

2-Year FRN (r) 3/26 26.00 2.00 0.00 26.00

20-Year Bond (r) 3/31 24.00 0.00

10-Year TIPS (r) 3/31 13.00 1.00

2-Year Note 3/31 60.00 0.00

5-Year Note 3/31 61.00 0.00

7-Year Note 3/31 62.00 0.00 71.59 148.41

1107.00 411.20 695.80

Estimates are italicized. r = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 274

* This Financing table is meant to be illustrative based on meeting discussions and does not indicate how Treasury will actually issue

debt in the future.

** Maturing amount is based on private holdings as of 01/29/2021 and subject to change based on Fed purchases.

^ Change is with respect to previous auction. For securities with reopenings, change from new cusip to new cusip, 1st reopening

 to 1st reopening, and etc.
EXHIBIT 99.1 - CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
               1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
               OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


                            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 CPI Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q/A for the period ending November 9, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. David Pierson,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Subsection 1350, as adopted pursuant to Subsection 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

By:  /s/ J. David Pierson
     --------------------------
         J. David Pierson
         Chief Executive Officer
         May 12, 2003


                                       52