alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                         DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               848,257
<SECURITIES>                                       3,045,709
<RECEIVABLES>                                      1,491,011
<ALLOWANCES>                                         105,000
<INVENTORY>                                          377,949
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   6,200,949
<PP&E>                                            13,636,676
<DEPRECIATION>                                     7,356,270
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    14,571,210
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                514,139
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                             223,180
<OTHER-SE>                                        12,037,841
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      14,571,210
<SALES>                                            5,303,961
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   5,793,837
<CGS>                                              2,595,551
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      4,866,029
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      16,130
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      39,379
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      911,678
<INCOME-TAX>                                         335,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  575,978
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                         575,978
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0
        

</TABLE>
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of

- )

)

Independent Marine Oil Services LLC ) ASBCA No. 62603

)

Under Contract Nos. SPE606

- 19

- M

- 3028

SPE606

- 19

- M

- 3029 )

)

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT : Steven J. Lewicky, Esq.

Lewicky, O’Connor, Hunt & Meiser, LLC

Fulton, MD

James F. Sposato, Esq.

Counsel

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Daniel K. Poling, Esq.

DLA Chief Trial Attorney

Alex M. Mayfield, Esq.

Matthew Vasquez, Esq.

Howard Kaufer, Esq.

Trial Attorneys

DLA Energy

Fort Belvoir, VA

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The appeal has been withdrawn. Accordingly, it is dismissed from the Board’s

docket with prejudice.

Dated: April 6 , 2021

RICHARD SHACKLEFORD

Administrative Judge

Acting Chairman

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals2 I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 62603

, Appeal of Independent

Marine Oil Services LLC , rendered in conformance with the Boa rd’s Charter.

Dated: April 7, 2021

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10Q -- THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000039092
<NAME> FRIEDMAN INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         544,906
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,630,363
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 23,460,314
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,784,718
<PP&E>                                      14,825,482
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,968,977
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,698,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,247,784
<BONDS>                                      4,400,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,469,731
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,033,634
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                42,698,709
<SALES>                                     38,300,432
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,300,432
<CGS>                                       35,065,621
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               36,419,349
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             115,588
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,782,674
<INCOME-TAX>                                   606,110
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,176,564
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,176,564
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        

</TABLE>
#### James R. YARBOROUGH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1093.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 25, 1972.

Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, and Jeffrey H. Barker, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Nelson E. Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of Hawkins v. State, Fla.1968, 206 So.2d 5 and Irvin v. Dowd, 1961, 366 U.S. 717, 722, 81 S.Ct. 1639, 1642, 6 L.Ed.2d 751.

REED, C. J., and OWEN and MAGER, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1
 
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Number Nine Visual Technology Corporation
 
  We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 dated April 29, 1996 pertaining to the 1994 Employee, Director and
Consultant Stock Option Plan and 1995 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Number
Nine Visual Technology Corporation, and in the Registration Statement on Form
S-8 dated May 22, 1996 pertaining to the 1996 Employee, Director and
Consultant Stock Option Plan of Number Nine Visual Technology Corporation, of
our report dated March 24, 1997, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets of Number Nine Visual Technology Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 28, 1996, and December 30, 1995 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the
fiscal years in the three-year period ended December 28, 1996, which report
appears in the Form 10-K of Number Nine Visual Technology Corporation for the
fiscal year ended December 28, 1996.
 
Boston, Massachusetts                     /s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
March 24, 1997
**Exhibit 31.1**
I, Jack Friedman, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive    Officer of Friedman Industries, Incorporated, a Texas    corporation, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/Aof Friedman Industries, Incorporated;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, result of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

          a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;

          b) [intentionally omitted per SEC release 33-8238]

          c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

          d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant'sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

     5. The registrant's other certifying officers(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant's board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

          a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

          b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Dated: April 19, 2005 /s/  JACK FRIEDMAN Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  registration  statements
(Nos. 333-90319 and 333-90313) on Form S-8 of CareAdvantage,  Inc. of our report
dated February 22, 2001, on our audit of the consolidated  financial  statements
as of and for the year ended December 31, 2000 included in the December 31, 2001
annual report on Form 10-KSB of CareAdvantage, Inc.

/s/ Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP
New York, New York
March 20, 2002
256 La. 848

#### Emile M. WEBER, Individually and for and on Behalf of his Minor Sons, Earl Weber and Steve Weber v. FIDELITY & CASUALTY INSURANCE CO. OF NEW YORK et al.

No. 50779.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 30, 1970.

In re: Emile M. Weber, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 236 So.2d 616.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY

(Section 302)

I, John T. English, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Florida Public Utilities Company (the registrant);

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(s) 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)) 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) 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; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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(s) 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; and

(b) 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.



Date: November 12, 2004



By  /s/ John T. English

John T. English

Chief Executive Officer
#### Dottie W. SNOW v. CITY OF SHREVEPORT et al.

No. 54391.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 1, 1974.

In re: City of Shreveport applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Caddo. 287 So.2d 647.

Writ denied. On the facts found by the court of appeal, the result is correct.

DIXON, J., recused.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10(b)

                           REPRESENTATION OF COUNSEL


I, Sandra M. DaDalt, in my capacity as counsel to Sun Life of Canada (U.S.)
Variable Account F (the "Account") have reviewed this Post-Effective
Amendment to the Registration Statement (File No. 333-30844) of the Account
(the "Post-Effective Amendment") which is being filed pursuant to paragraph
(b) of Rule 485 under the Securities Act of 1933. Based on my review of the
Post-Effective Amendment and such other material relating to the operations
of the Account as I deemed relevant, I hereby certify as of the date of
filing the Post-Effective Amendment, that the Post-Effective Amendment does
not contain disclosure which would render it ineligible to become effective
pursuant to paragraph (b) of Rule 485.


I hereby consent to the filing of this representation as part of the
Post-Effective Amendment.

                                              /s/ SANDRA M. DADALT
                                              ----------------------
                                              Sandra M. DaDalt, Esq.


July 27, 2001
# Official Journal C 114A/10 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 114A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6510 March 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 114A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6510 March 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2022/C 114 A/01 | Notice of open competition – EPSO/AD/399/22 – Administrators (AD 7) in the field of Audit | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2022/C 114 A/01

Notice of open competition – EPSO/AD/399/22 – Administrators (AD 7) in the field of Audit

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Leon THOMAS v. H. M. “Mike” CANNON, Clerk, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge.

No. 60751.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 14, 1977.

In re: Leon Thomas applying for remedial writs.

Writ denied. Relator is represented by counsel, who has filed a brief in this Court. The case is assigned in this Court on November 21, 1977.
Selecting and Applying Performance Audit Methodologies

(8 hours)

Course Overview

Selecting the most appropriate methodology is key to the success of any performance audit. 

This requires careful consideration of various methodological approaches and a solid 

understanding of the strengths and limitations of each approach. Through lecture, class 

discussion, and small group exercises, this course covers the characteristics of different audit 

methodologies, factors to consider when selecting and implementing an approach, tips for 

documenting and reporting for each methodology, and questions to ask when using specialists

such as statisticians for technical support. This course is offered over 2 half days.

CPEs: 8

Who Should Attend

This course is designed to help federal, state, or local auditors understand how to select and 

apply methodologies from a range of options. Both new and seasoned auditors, as well as team 

leaders, can benefit from the discussion of each option and the related practical considerations.

Course Objectives

Participants will be able to

• Identify the wide range of methodologies that can be used in performance audits

• Understand the factors to consider when selecting methodologies to address audit 

objectives

• Apply more commonly used methodologies

• Understand the differences and implications of using probability (generalizable) and 

nongeneralizable samples

Course Topics

Overview

• Overview of methodology options

• Considerations for selection

Sample Design

• Overview of sampling options 

• Probability (generalizable) sampling: characteristics and sample selection factors

• Nongeneralizable sampling: characteristics and sample selection factors 
Interviews

• Types of interviews: structured, semi-structured, unstructured

• Benefits and factors to consider

• The interview process, from planning to documentation

Surveys

• Types of surveys

• Benefits and factors to consider

• Key steps in survey development and implementation

File Reviews, Reviews of Studies and Secondary Data Analysis Sources

• Conducting file reviews and observations

o Designing and implementing data collection instruments

o Benefits and factors to consider

• Assessing studies or evaluations conducted by agencies, contractors, or others

• Key steps in planning and using agency data or other secondary sources

o Benefits and factors to consider

Four Less Commonly-Used Methods

• Small group methods (like expert panels or focus groups)

• Content analysis

• Case studies

• Ethnographic methods
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING 

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED 

 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 

 OF FLORIDA 

 SECOND DISTRICT 

GENCI XHELAJ and ) 

TEUTA KANNI, ) 

 ) 

 Appellants, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Case No. 2D16-1804 

 ) 

MCCORMICK 105, LLC, ) 

 ) 

 Appellee. ) 

 ) 

Opinion filed June 2, 2017. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas 

County; Bruce Boyer, Judge. 

Michael P. Fuino of Weidner Law, P.A., 

St. Petersburg, for Appellants. 

Manuel Farach of McGlinchey Stafford, 

Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM. 

 We affirm the final judgment of foreclosure in all respects, save one. The 

appellee confesses there was no competent, substantial evidence to support the 

attorney's fee award within the foreclosure judgment, and so we reverse and remand for 

the trial court to conduct further proceedings to establish the correct amount due and 
- 2 - 

owing. See Boyette v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, 164 So. 3d 9, 11 (Fla. 2d DCA 

2015) (reversing and remanding for further proceedings where foreclosure judgment's 

inclusion of interest, property inspection fees, and attorney's fees was not supported by 

competent, substantial evidence); see also Hovannesian v. PennyMac Corp., 190 So. 

3d 681, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (observing where foreclosure judgment included 

unsupported awards of interest, attorney's fees, and miscellaneous expenses, "[t]he 

appropriate remedy is to reverse and remand the judgment for further proceedings to 

properly establish the correct amount due and owing"). 

 Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded. 

NORTHCUTT, LUCAS, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

 <ARTICLE>                 5                      
 <MULTIPLIER>           1000                      
                                   
 <S>                <C>                          <C>  
 <PERIOD-TYPE>      9-MOS                        3-MOS
 <FISCAL-YEAR-END>            FEB-28-1997                FEB-28-1997 
 <PERIOD-START>                MAR-1-1996                 SEP-1-1996
 <PERIOD-END>                 NOV-30-1996                NOV-30-1996   
 <CASH>                              1455                       1455
 <SECURITIES>                           0                          0
 <RECEIVABLES>                       4193                       4193
 <ALLOWANCES>                          51                         51
 <INVENTORY>                         6807                       6807
 <CURRENT-ASSETS>                   13211                      13211
 <PP&E>                             14009                      14009
 <DEPRECIATION>                      7886                       7886
 <TOTAL-ASSETS>                     20395                      20395
 <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               4500                       4500
 <BONDS>                                0                          0
 <COMMON>                              17                         17 
 <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0                          0
 <PREFERRED>                            0                          0
 <OTHER-SE>                         13592                      13592
 <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       20395                      20395
 <SALES>                            17576                       6078
 <TOTAL-REVENUES>                   17576                       6078
 <CGS>                              13076                       4595
 <TOTAL-COSTS>                       5311                       1771
 <OTHER-EXPENSES>                       7                          1
 <LOSS-PROVISION>                       0                          0
 <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   163                         58
 <INCOME-PRETAX>                     (981)                      (347)
 <INCOME-TAX>                          40                         40
 <INCOME-CONTINUING>                    0                          0
 <DISCONTINUED>                         0                          0
 <EXTRAORDINARY>                        0                          0
 <CHANGES>                              0                          0
 <NET-INCOME>                       (1021)                      (387)
 <EPS-PRIMARY>                      (0.85)                     (0.32)
 <EPS-DILUTED>                      (0.85)                     (0.32)