alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATIONS
   2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants first fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  /s/ Aaron N. DanielsAaron N. DanielsChief Financial Officer
 29
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRANDON SMITH,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 296 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of October, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### REVISED APRIL 28, 2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10571
JOE ANN HAMILTON; ERNEST HAMILTON; ALLEAN BROOKS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; CAROLYN JOHNSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; KIMBERLY WILLIAMS-THOMPSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; SUZANNA L. BROWN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated;
Plaintiffs - Appellees

v. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CV-1442

BeforeJONES, ChiefJudge, and BENAVIDES and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April 27, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce ClerkNo. 10-10571

2 This court recently affirmed the denial of class certification in a suit involving title i nsurance premium discounts allegedly due under Texas law. Benavides v. Chicago Title Insurance Co. , No. 10-10136, 2011 WL 1107009 (5th Cir. Mar. 23, 2011). Since the present case involves issues similar to those addressed in Benavides, we VACATE the district court’s class certification order and REMAND for reconsideration in light of Benavides

. Without expressing a view on the merits of this case, we also caution plaintiff’s counsel to avoid unnecessarily extending this litigation if Benavides compels an end to it. See 28 U.S.C. § 1927. VACATED and REMANDED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 6874]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3653]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[TD 8692]
RIN 1545-AR76


Reissuance of Mortgage Credit Certificates; Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, Treasury.

ACTION: Correction to the final and temporary regulations.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to the final and temporary 
regulations (TD 8692) which were published in the Federal Register on 
Tuesday, December 17, 1996 (61 FR 66212). The final and temporary 
regulations relates to the reissuance of mortgage credit certificates.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Wachtel, (202) 622-3980 (not a 
toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final and temporary regulations that is subject to this 
correction is under section 25 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

    As published, the final and temporary regulations (TD 8692) 
contains an error which may prove to be misleading and is in need of 
clarification.

Correction of Publication

    Accordingly, the publication of the final and temporary regulations 
(TD 8692) which is the subject of FR Doc. 96-31772 is corrected as 
follows:
    On page 66212, column 3, in the heading, the RIN ``RIN 1545-AR57'' 
is corrected to read ``RIN 1545-AR76''.
Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Chief, Regulations Unit Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate).
[FR Doc. 97-3653 Filed 2-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Registrants' Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
November 23, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-26-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-23-1997
<CASH>                                          75,291
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  226,975
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,786
<INVENTORY>                                    322,049
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               688,018
<PP&E>                                       1,099,600
<DEPRECIATION>                                 544,655
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,408,179
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          356,413
<BONDS>                                        359,221
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        41,870
<OTHER-SE>                                     568,015
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,408,179
<SALES>                                        771,954
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               771,954
<CGS>                                          586,015
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  586,015
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               135,761
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   345
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,183
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 43,564
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,989
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,575
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,575
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .66
        

</TABLE>
#### Donna M. DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. PRUDENTIAL PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 95-4190-DES.

United States District Court, D. Kansas.

Nov. 13, 1997.

*ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC*

SAFFELS, District Judge.

On April 30, 1997, this court entered a Memorandum and Order in the above-captioned case, reported at 961 F.Supp. 1496. *1141Page 1498, paragraph four, lines one through four should read: “The trial court conducted a motions hearing on August 25, 1993, at which all parties, including Prudential, were represented. The court issued an order resolving.... ”

Page 1500, paragraph one, lines five through six should read: “Indeed, the court seriously doubts there is such a distinction. Waiting to file a known claim.... ”

IT IS SO ORDERED.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 12.1



                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

               SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Annual Report of Compania de Telecomunicaciones de
Chile S.A. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2002, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Claudio Munoz Z., Chief Executive Officer, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


June 30, 2003
                                      By: /s/ Claudio Munoz Z.
                                          -------------------------------
                                          Name:  Claudio Munoz Z.
                                          Title: Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

               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 Form 10-Q of Dean Holding Company (the "Company") for the
quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Barry A. Fromberg, Executive
Vice President and Chief 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 the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                    /s/ Barry A. Fromberg
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Barry A. Fromberg
                                                    Executive Vice President and
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                                    Date: May 15, 2003


Note: This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed, except to the
      extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER (1)

Pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as  created  by  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  the  following  certification  is  being  made to
accompany the  Registrant's  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
January 27, 2007:

In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Del Global  Technologies  Corp. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 27, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark A.
Zorko,  Principal  Accounting  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350,  adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002 that to my knowledge:

   (1) The Report  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section  13(a) or
       Section 15(d), as applicable,  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
       amended; 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/ Mark A. Zorko
                                          -------------------------
                                          Name: Mark A. Zorko
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          Date: February 28, 2007

   (1) A signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
       been provided to Del Global Technologies Corp and will be retained by Del
       Global  Technologies  Corp.  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
       Commission or its staff upon request.

       The foregoing  certification  is being  furnished  solely  pursuant to 18
       U.S.C.  Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
       separate disclosure document.
```
#### Lillie Mae SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. M-188.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 21, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Jean G. RUSSELL v. Billy F. RUSSELL.

77-496.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Aug. 25, 1978.

Joe C. Cassady of Cassady, Fuller & Marsh, Enterprise, for appellant.

John C. Dowling, Enterprise, for appellee.

MADDOX, Justice.

Appellant/plaintiff, Jean G. Russell, sought to have a deed transferring a house to the appellee set aside on the ground of fraud and failure of consideration. Appellant and appellee, Billy F. Russell, were married in 1963, and divorced in 1974; custody of their son was awarded to the husband. The subject property had remained in their joint names after the divorce.

In November, 1976, appellant was summoned to the home of her former husband’s parents where she signed the instrument she now seeks to set aside.

Appellant contends that appellee’s mother had requested that she stop by to sign a *will*to ensure that the jointly held property would be left, in the event of the divorced parents’ death, to the infant son; that she believed she was signing such a will at the time; and that she had no reason to believe otherwise, until she saw a “For Sale” sign in front of the house some time later. She argues that there was a fraud perpetrated against her requiring the cancellation of the deed, and that there was an absolute failure of consideration, because nothing which the law deems good and valuable consideration changed hands in this instance.

The former husband admits that the evidence surrounding the execution of the deed is conflicting, but he contends that there was evidence presented that there *1054was no mention of a will, and that the evidence showed that appellant signed the document in the presence of him and his parents after having first read it, and with no threats or duress, but rather of her own free will. In short, he argues that his former wife failed to prove fraud.

As to the issuance of consideration, appel-lee argues that the purported conveyance was part of the final property settlement of their divorce and that by signing, appellant relieved herself of liability on an outstanding mortgage recorded against the property-

We affirm.

In cases where the grantor seeks to set aside a deed on the ground that a fraudulent misrepresentation induced the signing of the deed, this Court has required that the fraud must be clearly and satisfactorily proven. *Ingram*v. *Horn,*294 Ala. 353, 317 So.2d 485 (1975).

As to Mrs. Russell’s theory that there was a lack of consideration, it is well settled that a deed is valid and operative between the parties and their privies, whether it is founded upon a consideration or not. *Ingram v. Horn,*supra; *Taylor v. Godsey*(1978), Ala.Sup., 357 So.2d 979.

The cause was heard ore tenus. Where the trial court makes findings after hearing witnesses ore tenus, every presumption will be indulged in favor of the court’s findings, and its findings will not be disturbed on appeal unless they are found to be palpably wrong. *Casey*v. *Beck,*Ala., 350 So.2d 429 (1977).

AFFIRMED.

TORBERT, C. J., and JONES, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

CHRISTOPHER LEE DUNCAN, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-176 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed April 3, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Mary M. Handsel, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Tosha Cohen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Katie Salemi Ashby, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. CASANUEVA, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and

Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors

so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 15

- BS

- 1168

IN RE: MARGAUX D. HALL,

Respondent. Board Docket No. 15

- BD

- 038

Bar Registration No. 990435 BDN: 62

- 12, et al.

BEFORE: Beckwith and Easterly, Associate Judges, and Fa rrell, Senior Judge.

O R D E R

(Filed

- December 10 , 2015)

Upon consideration of the petition of the Board on Professional Responsibility pursuant

to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13 (c), to suspend respondent based on her claim of disability and Bar

Counsel having interposed no objection thereto, it is hereby

ORDERED that respondent is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the

District of Columbia, effective immediately, and that any pending matters be held in abeyance

pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, § 1 3 (e) until further order of the court pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, §

13 (c). Respondent’s reinstatement to the District of Columbia Bar shall be in accordance with

the provisions of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 13 (g), and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that respondent’s a ttention is drawn to the requirements of D.C.

Bar R. XI, §§ 14 and 16, relating to suspended attorneys; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall file an affidavit in compliance with D.C.

Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) with the court and the Board and shall s erve a copy of the affidavit on Bar

Counsel.

PER CURIAM
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 09**  **- 2340** 

In Re : JOHN S. BREEN; TERESA J. BREEN , Debtors
.

--------------------------------------- JOHN S. BREEN; TERESA J. BREEN, Plaintiffs

- Appellants ,
v. ZVI GUTT MAN , Trustee

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore
. Richard D. Bennett , District Judge. ( 1:09

- cv - 02315

- RDB; BK

- 02

- 58017

- RAG )

Submitted : August 26, 2010 Decided: August 31, 2010

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. John S. Breen, Teresa J. Breen, Appellants Pro Se. Zvi Guttman, LAW OFFICES OF ZVI GUTTMAN, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appelle e .2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: John S. Breen and Teresa J. Breen appeal the district
court ’s orders dismissing their appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order and denying their motion for reconsideration
. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons s tated by the district
court. Breen v. Guttman , Nos. 1:09

- cv - 02315

- RDB; BK

- 02

- 58017

- RAG (D. Md. Sept. 21, 2009; filed Nov. 3, 2009 , entered Nov. 4, 2009 . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED