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

<ARTICLE>                                          UT
<CIK> 0000077227
<NAME> PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000
<CURRENCY>                                 US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<BOOK-VALUE>                                 PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                   1,225,575
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                   309,844
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                        229,447
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                    1,854,139
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              3,619,005
<COMMON>                                      105,812
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                     285,486
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            21,747  <F1>
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                413,045
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         100,000  <F2>
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                          517,780
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             10,700
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                           0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 98,600
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      13
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                           0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     1,794
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                  474
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>              2,476,599
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               3,619,005
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                     663,623
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                0
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                    606,380
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                    606,380
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        57,243
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              2,957
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 60,200
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       32,318  <F3>
<NET-INCOME>                                   17,472  <F4>
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  17,472
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       55,000  <F5>
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      33,694
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                       (141,255)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
<FN>
<F1> INCLUDES ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME OF $10.
<F2> REPRESENTS COMPANY-OBLIGATED TRUST PREFERRED SECURITIES OF $100,000.
<F3> INCLUDES AMOUNT FOR COMPANY-OBLIGATED TRUST PREFERRED SECURITIES OF
$5,199.
<F4> AMOUNT IS NET OF INCOME TAX EXPENSE OF $10,410.
<F5> REPRESENTS COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS PAID TO PARENT CORPORATION.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Charles J. COPELAND, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. T-27.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 29, 1973.

Charles J. Copeland, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty, Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, in this original action, seeks a writ of habeas corpus wherein he alleges that he was “. . . convicted for breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor”, and then reasons “. . . I was convicted of a specific misdemeanor . . . . Now if the offense is breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, why was I sentenced for committing a felony.”

The answer to Petitioner’s query is found in Section 810.05, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., entitled “Breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor”, which provides:

> “. . . Whoever breaks and enters . . . [enumerates various properties and chattels] with intent to commit a *259misdemeanor shall be guilty of a *felony*of the third degree, punishable as provided in § 775.082, . . . . ” .[Emphasis Supplied]

Subsection 775.082(2) (c), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides a penalty not exceeding 5 years for a felony of the third degree. Petitioner alleges he was sentenced to a five-year term.

The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is without merit and is denied.

SPECTOR, C. J., and JOHNSON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Howard S. Modlin,
      Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer, and I, William
      G.
      Henry, Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer,
      each of General DataComm Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), do each hereby
      certify, to the best of my knowledge that:





(1)
      The
      Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006
      being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





This
      Certification accompanies this Form 10-QSB as an exhibit, but shall not be
      deemed as having been filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 or as a separate disclosure document of the Company or
      the
      certifying officer.








Date:
      August 14, 2006


/s/
      Howard S. Modlin


Howard
      S.
      Modlin,


Chairman
      of the Board, President and


Chief
      Executive Officer













/s/
      William G. Henry


William
      G. Henry


Vice
      President, Finance and Administration


and
      Chief
      Financial Officer
#### Donald McLEOD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-85.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 6, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
Four Year 
Credit Agreement


AMENDMENT NO. 3


	THIS AMENDMENT NO.3 (this "Amendment"), dated as of May 
29, 1997, among GENERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION (the "Company") 
and the undersigned commercial banking institutions (herein 
collectively "Banks").

	WITNESSETH:

	WHEREAS, the Company and the Banks are parties to a 
certain Four Year Credit Agreement, dated as of January 12, 
1994 as amended as of January 12, 1995 and May 31, 1996, 
(the "Four Year Credit Agreement"); and
	
	WHEREAS, the parties desire to further amend certain 
terms of the Four Year Credit  Agreement.

	NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements 
contained herein, the parties hereto hereby agree as 
follows:

1.	Except as otherwise defined herein, the 
capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings 
respectively ascribed to them in the Four Year Credit 
Agreement.

2.	Each Bank's Commitment shall be the amount set 
forth opposite its signature hereto, as such amount may be 
reduced or increased from time to time pursuant to Sections 
1.1.6, 1.1.7 and 1.1.8 or Section 13.5 of the Four Year 
Credit Agreement.

3.	The term "Revolver Expiration Date" is hereby 
amended to mean the earlier of May 28, 2002 or the date of 
termination in whole of the Commitments.  
 
4.	The  term "Agreement" is hereby amended to mean 
this "Five Year Credit Agreement" and all references to the 
"Five Year Credit Agreement" shall be deemed to refer to the 
Four Year Credit Agreement as hereby amended.

5.	The table in Section 3.1.8, Applicable Margin, is 
hereby deleted and replaced with the following:

Public Debt Rating        Eurodollar 
                           Margin             CD Margin

Level 1:
AA-/Aa3 or higher          .165%               .290%

Level 2:
A-/A3 or higher, but
less than Level 1          .180%               .305%

Level 3:
BBB-/Baa3 or higher,
but less than Level 2      .300%               .425%

Level 4:
Less than BBB-/Baa3        .400%               .525%

	6.	The table in Section 3.2, Facility Fee, is hereby 
deleted and replaced with the following:


Public Debt Rating           Facility Fee Percentage

Level 1:
AA-/Aa3 or higher                  .060 %

Level 2:
A-/A3 or higher, but
less than Level 1                  .080 %

Level 3:
BBB-/Baa3 or higher,
but less than Level 2              .150%

Level 4:
Less than BBB-/Baa3                .250 %


7.	Except as set forth in this Amendment, all terms 
and conditions of the Four Year Credit Agreement shall 
remain unchanged.

	IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and each Bank have 
caused this Amendment to be executed, as of the day and year 
first above written, by one of  its officers thereunto duly 
authorized.

				GENERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION

				By:   Terry J. Mortimer
				   __________________________
				Vice President and Treasurer
				One High Ridge Park
				Stamford, CT  06904
				Attention:  Treasurer
				Telecopier No.: (203) 329-4365
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Metromedia International Group,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Mark S. Hauf, President, Chief Executive Office and Chairmen of
the Board 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:  a)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
andb)
    
    the Information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company. Dated
this 17th day of June 2004. METROMEDIA INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC./S/ MARK S. HAUFMark S. HaufPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board(Principal Executive Officer)
 60
#### Frank HAMMOND, Appellant, v. PERMA, a division of Munroe Lighting, Inc., a corporation, Appellee.

No. 69-709.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 22, 1970.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; E. Summers Sheffey, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 10.8

                     THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGENCY AGREEMENT

         THIS THIRD AMENDMENT (the "Amendment") to the Agency Agreement, as
amended by the First and Second Amendments thereto (as so amended, the "Agency
Agreement"), dated as of September 11, 2000, by and between ebank.com, Inc. a
Georgia corporation (the "Company"), and Attkisson Carter & Akers (the "Agent")
is made as of June 5, 2001 by and between the Company and the Agent. Capitalized
terms used by not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the
Agency Agreement.

                               W I T N E S S E T H


         WHEREAS, the Company and the Agent desire to amend the Agency Agreement
as provided herein,

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual
covenants and agreements herein, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:

         SECTION 1. Amendment to Agency Agreement. Section 2.2 of the Agency
Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the second sentence of such section in
its entirety and replacing it with the following: "However the Company or Agent
may in the Company's or the Agent's sole discretion, as the case may be,
terminate this Agreement at any time after June 5, 2001."

         SECTION 2. Effect on Merger Agreement. Except a otherwise specifically
provided herein, the Agency Agreement shall not be amended but shall remain in
full force and effect.

         SECTION 3. Headings. The Section headings contained in this Amendment
are for reference purposes only and will not affect in any way the meaning or
interpretation of this Amendment.

         SECTION 4. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed simultaneously
in counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which
together will constitute one and the same instrument.


                            [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]


<PAGE>


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment to be duly
executed as of the day and year first above written.




                              EBANK.COM, INC.



                              By:
                                 -------------------------------------------
                              Its:
                                  ------------------------------------------


                              ATTKISSON CARTER & AKERS



                              By:
                                 -------------------------------------------
                              Its:
                                  ------------------------------------------
#### HIBERNIA NATIONAL BANK IN NEW ORLEANS v. Dave DeGRAAUW, etc., et al.

No. 8843.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

July 15, 1977.

*1224W. Larry Floyd, New Orleans, for relator.

Wayne G. Cresap, New Orleans, for respondents.

Before REDMANN, STOULIG and ' MORIAL, JJ.

REDMANN, Judge.

For lack of jurisdiction over this application for supervisory writs to the First City Court of the City of New Orleans, we transfer it to the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans.

We have supervisory jurisdiction only “over cases in which an appeal would lie” to us, and appeals lie to us in all civil matters within our circuit “except as otherwise provided by this constitution”, La.Const.1974 art. 5 § 10(A). Art. 5 § 16(B) provides that district courts “shall have appellate jurisdiction as provided by law” and La.C.C.P. 4833 B (as amended, Acts 1976 No. 84 § 1) provides that “[t]he appeal from a city court when the amount in contest is one thousand dollars or less exclusive of interest, shall be returnable to the district court of the district in which the city is located.”

(Art. 4833’s heading — in any case not part of the law, C.C.P. 5057 — reads “Jurisdiction of city courts in municipalities of ten thousand or more population, New Orleans city courts excepted; appeal”. The heading appears to except New Orleans only from the jurisdiction provision and not from the appeal provision. The text of the article, subsection A, provides “This Subsection shall not apply to the city courts of New Orleans.” There is no similar provision in subsection B, which makes appeals returnable to district court or to court of appeal on the basis of the amount in contest.)

The Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans is given jurisdiction over appeals in this case by C.C.P. 4833 B. We therefore have no appellate jurisdiction and no supervisory jurisdiction in this case. The District Court presumably has the authority to issue supervisory writs, as “needful writs” in aid of its jurisdiction within Const, art. 5 § 2.

Application transferred to the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans.
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 1

Electing the following officers of the House of Representatives: Donnald

K. Anderson, Clerk; Werner W. Brandt, Sergeant at Arms; James T.

Molloy, Doorkeeper; and James David Ford, Chaplain.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. HOYER submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Electing the following officers of the House of Representatives: Donnald K. Anderson, Clerk; Werner W. Brandt,

Sergeant at Arms; James T. Molloy, Doorkeeper; and

James David Ford, Chaplain.

1 Resolved,

2 That Donnald K. Anderson, of the State of Califor3 nia, be, and he is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of

4 Representatives;

5 That Werner W. Brandt, of the Commonwealth of

6 Virginia, be, and he is hereby, chosen Sergeant at Arms

7 of the House of Representatives;
2

•HRES 1 ATH

1 That James T. Molloy, of the State of New York,

2 be, and he is hereby, chosen Doorkeeper of the House of

3 Representatives; and

4 That Reverend James David Ford, of the Common5 wealth of Virginia, be, and he is hereby, chosen Chaplain

6 of the House of Representatives.

Æ
No. 00-932.

#### Watson *v.*Ocean County College Board of Trustees et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### John V. REITZ; Judith MacDonald; Dale R. Peterson; Earl D. Riddle; Jack E. Evans; Harlan C. Selby; Robert E. Johnsen; Perry Coleman; Nickolas J. Madesh; Robert A. Graham; Jerry E. Marks, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LEASING CONSULTANTS ASSOCIATES; William McKenna; Richard A. Heitmeyer; Richard D. Wellbrock; William B. Ward, et al.; Global Computer Corporation; Ronald Johnson; Texcom Equipment Corporation; Comdisco, Inc.; Kenneth M. Pontikes; Martin Karnoff; John Costello; David Marks; Gordon S. Rosen; Software Systems for Word Processors, Inc.; Berlent Industries, Inc.; Harvey Berlent, Defendants-Appellees. Anthony E. CATALAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PAULSON INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC.; Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow; Computer Value Associates; Gordon S. Rosen Associates, Inc.; Technical Marketing Services, Inc.; Leasing Consultants Associates; William McKenna; Richard A. Heitmeyer; Richard D. Wellbrock; William B. Ward, et al., Defendants-Appellees. John GILBERTSON and Janice Gilbertson, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Anders G. ARNHEIM; Alanthus Corporation, formerly known as Technology Finance Group, Inc.; Computer Value Associates; American Computer Equipment Leasing; Leasing Consultants Associates; Gordon S. Rosen Associates, Inc.; William McKenna; Texcom Equipment Corporation; Richard A. Heitmeyer; Richard D. Wellbrock; William B. Ward, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 88-4077, 88-4099 and 88-4100.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 20, 1992.

Before: PREGERSON, TROTT, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

The judgment of this court expressed in a memorandum disposition filed on February 5, 1990, 895 F.2d 1418, having been reversed by the Supreme Court, the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the decision of *1442the Supreme Court in *Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson, et al.,*— U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 2773, 115 L.Ed.2d 321 (1991).
**EXHIBIT 99.10**

** **

**CONSENT OF MICHAEL GABORA**

 

March 15, 2012

 

Brigus Gold Corp.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

 

**Re: Brigus Gold Corp.**

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

I hereby consent to (i) the use of my name in connection withthe following documents and reports, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F forthe year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Form 40-F”) of Brigus Gold Corp. (the “Company”) to which this consentrelates: (A) the technical report entitled “Black Fox Project National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report” dated January6, 2011 (the “Report”), (B) the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2011 and (C)the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2011, (ii) the inclusion or incorporationby reference of information derived from the Report in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-113889, 333-162558and 333-167757), as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and ExchangeCommission pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, orto any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporatedby reference in the above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.

 

Sincerely,
#### AMERICAN EMPLOYERS' INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Martin WIENER, Appellee.

No. 69-858.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Jan. 28, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Stewart F. LaMotte, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.01



                CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350
           OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE



In connection with the Quarterly Report of General Employment
Enterprises, Inc. (the ?Company?) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
December 31, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the "Report"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his
capacity as an officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to his knowledge:

      (1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



Date:  February 5, 2007                    By:  /s/ Herbert F. Imhoff, Jr.
			                         Herbert F. Imhoff, Jr.
			                         Chairman of the Board, Chief
			                         Executive Officer and President
			                         (Chief executive officer)


Date:  February 5, 2007                    By:  /s/ Kent M. Yauch
			                         Kent M. Yauch
			                         Vice President, Chief Financial
			                         Officer and Treasurer
			                         (Chief financial officer)
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00426-CV 

IN RE HAROLD NEIL JACOBSON, M.D. RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

We have considered “Relator’s Unopposed Motion To Dismiss Original 

Proceeding.” It is the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; 

therefore, we dismiss this original proceeding. 

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and WALKER, J. 

DELIVERED: February 3, 2014

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
<PAGE>

                 EX-21.1 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


Jurisdiction of Incorporation of Subsidiary or Organization 1. P-Com United
Kingdom, Inc., Delaware; 2. P-Com (Barbados) FSC Limited, Barbados; 3 P-Com
Finance Corporation, Delaware; 4. P-Com Italia S,p.A., Italy; 5. P-Com Network
Services, Inc., Delaware; 6. P-Com GmbH, Germany(in liquidation); 7. Telematics
Inc., Virginia; 8. P-Com Network Services (UK) Limited, England; 9. P-Com Corp.,
Int'l (Cayman) Ltd., Cayman Islands.

<PAGE>