alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                             NORDSTROM CREDIT, INC.

                                13531 EAST CALEY

                            ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80111

                        CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
                  OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
                              FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

I, Kevin Knight, the President of Nordstrom Credit, Inc. (the "Company") in
compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that the Company's Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the period ended January 31, 2003 (the "Report") filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission:

         -        fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
                  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                        /s/ Kevin T. Knight
                                       --------------------------------------
                                        Kevin T. Knight
                                        President
                                        April 17, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Nordstrom Credit, Inc. and will be maintained by Nordstrom Credit,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 23

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) 
of John Hancock Variable Life Insurance Company of our report dated February 14,
1997, included in the Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration 
Statement (Form S-1 No. 33-62895) and the related Prospectus of John Hancock 
Variable Life Insurance Company.

Our audit also included the financial statement schedules of John Hancock 
Variable Life Insurance Company listed in Item 14(a). These schedules are the 
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an 
opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedules 
referred to above, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole, present fairly in all material respects the information set 
forth therein.

                                              ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 28, 1997
#### William Franklin (Buddy) JOHNS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. R-423.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 30, 1972.

William Franklin (Buddy) Johns, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Michael M. Corin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the annual report of SurgiCare, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Keith G. LeBlanc,
Chief Executive 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 to the best of my 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 result of operations of the Company. /s/  Keith G. LeBlancKeith G. LeBlanc, Chief Executive Officer
#### Julian E. WHITING, Jr., and Frances B. Whiting, Appellants, v. The CITY OF TALLAHASSEE and West American Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. II-72.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 26, 1978.

Douglas L. Stowell, Sam Spector, of Spector & Tunnicliff, Tallahassee, for appellants.

William S. Burns, Jr., of Marks, Gray, Conroy & Gibbs, Jacksonville, for appellees.

MELVIN, Judge.

The trial court dismissed with prejudice appellants’ complaint seeking recovery from the city for property damage which occurred in their Tallahassee residence after the city failed, in spite of two requests by appellants, to terminate its water service to the house. The facts revealed by the complaint were that appellants had entered into a utility service contract with the city in 1973, commencing with payment of a security deposit and continuing with payment of the monthly bills as they became due. In October, 1976, appellants, who were moving, requested the city to terminate all utility service to their house. They received a final bill in November at their new residence indicating that service had been terminated. They paid this bill. In December, they returned to the house and discovered that water was still being furnished to it. They called the city and again requested that water service to the residence be terminated and that the faucets be left open. In January, 1977, they returned to the house and discovered broken water pipes and water leakage throughout.

Appellants alleged in their complaint against the city that the property damage in the house had been caused by “willful negligence and breach of contract in failing *1187to turn off the water as requested . . The trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, finding that “the better expression of the law” was a 1931 Indiana case, *Frankfort Waterworks Co. v. McBride,*92 Ind.App. 680, 175 N.E. 140 (1931), which held that a cause of action based upon a contract to “turn off the water” was insufficient because it “lacks the important element of a consideration and it lacks mutuality.” We find that the complaint states a cause of action and reverse.

The contract sued upon was not only the contract to turn off water, but was rather the larger contract between the parties by which they implicitly agreed that in exchange for the appellants’ security deposit, monthly payments, and final payment, the city would furnish, and terminate, service at the times requested by appellants. This contract had all necessary requisites of mutuality and consideration. Moreover, the city represented to the appellants in the final bill that water service had been terminated. It represented again that service would be terminated when appellants called the second time. Appellants allegedly relied on these representations to their detriment, and the damage which occurred was directly traceable to the city’s failure to do what it said it would do. We find that a cause of action was stated in contract and in negligence.

The order of dismissal is REVERSED and the case REMANDED for trial.

MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur.
#### Adam LANDRENEAUX, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EVANGELINE PARISH POLICE JURY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 3364.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

April 22, 1971.

*625Donald Soileau, Mamou, for plaintiff-appellant.

Fusilier, Pucheu & Soileau by J. William Pucheu, Ville Platte, for defendant-appel-lee.

Before HOOD, MILLER and DOMEN-GEAUX, JJ.

MILLER, Judge.

Adam Landreneaux petitioned for a writ of mandamus to order the Evangeline Parish Police Jury to remove two cattleguards so that cattle belonging to him and to “others similarly situated” could graze along the public road and on all unfenced land along this road. The trial court sustained defendant’s exception of no cause of action holding that the writ of mandamus can not be used to order the police jury to perform an act which addresses itself to the discretion of the public body. Landreneaux appealed. We affirm.

Plaintiff has not alleged an abuse of discretion or that the placing or removal of cattleguards is a purely ministerial duty of the police jury. Landreneaux only contended that the placement of the two cattle-guards gave an unfair grazing advantage to those whose cattle are between the two cat-tleguards, and the placement constituted a burden on motorists without providing benefits to the parish.

As we held in the case of Deville v. City of Oakdale, 180 So.2d SS6, at SS8 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1965):

> “ * * * a reading of LSA-C.C.P. Articles 3861-3863 shows that a writ of mandamus may be issued directing a public officer or corporation to perform a ‘ministerial duty required by law’. Our jurisprudence is established that mandamus lies only to compel the performance of purely ministerial duties, or to correct an arbitrary abuse of discretion, and that it will not be issued in doubtful cases.” (Citations omitted.)

The extraordinary writ of mandamus will not lie because the action sought to be required of defendant is not merely ministerial, but involves significant use of judgment and discretion.

The cases cited by plaintiff-appellent [(McDonogh v. Calloway, 7 Rob. 442 (1844); Vicksburg, S. & P. Ry. Co. v. Webster Sand, Gravel & Construction Co., 132 La. 1051, 62 So. 140 (1913); and Louisiana Materials Co. v. Cronvich, 236 So.2d 510 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1970)] are distinguished for the reason that the writ of mandamus was not at issue.

The trial court judgment is affirmed. Costs of this appeal are assessed against plaintiff appellant.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1229 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1229

  To amend the Truth in Lending Act to empower the States to set the 
     maximum annual percentage rates applicable to consumer credit 
                 transactions, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 26, 2013

 Mr. Whitehouse (for himself and Ms. Warren) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, 
                       Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Truth in Lending Act to empower the States to set the 
     maximum annual percentage rates applicable to consumer credit 
                 transactions, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Empowering States' Rights To Protect 
Consumers Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. LIMITS ON ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATES.

    Chapter 2 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1631 et seq.) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 140B. LIMITS ON ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATES.

    ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the annual percentage 
rate applicable to any consumer credit transaction (other than a 
residential mortgage transaction), including any fees associated with 
such a transaction, may not exceed the maximum rate permitted by the 
laws of the State in which the consumer resides.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 8



Changes in subsidiaries of Océ N.V. since the listing thereof in Océ Form 20-F for its fiscal year ended November 30, 2003



|                                                |  |                                             |  |                                                                                                                  
|----------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Name of subsidiaries                            |  | Jurisdiction ofIncorporation ofOrganisation |  | Notes                                                                                                            
|Océ Printing Systems (South Africa) (Pty.) Ltd. |  | SouthAfrica                                 |  | Sold as per December 1, 2002.                                                                                    
|                                                |  |                                            
|Océ-Lima Mayer S.A.                             |  | Portugal                                    |  | Renamed into Océ-Portugal Equipamentos Gráficos S.A. as per March 25, 2003.                                      
|                                                |  |                                            
|Océ Credit Corporation                          |  | USA                                         |  | Renamed into Océ-Financial Services, Inc. as per May 30, 2003.                                                   
|                                                |  |                                            
|Océ Real Business Solutions B.V.                |  | TheNetherlands                              |  | Dissolved July 2003 and once more in March 2004.                                                                 
|                                                |  |                                            
|Océ Printing Systems USA, Inc.                  |  | USA                                         |  | Merger with Océ-USA, Inc. with name change into Océ North America, Inc. as per November 6, 2003.                 
|                                                |  |                                            
|Océ-USA, Inc.                                   |  | USA                                         |  | Merger with Océ Printing Systems USA, Inc. with name change into Océ North America, Inc. as per November 6, 2003.
|                                                |  |                                            
|Archer Management Services, Inc.                |  | USA                                         |  | Renamed into Océ Business Services, Inc. as per December 24, 2003.                                               
|                                                |  |                                            
|SCI Benson Guérande                             |  | France                                      |  | Dissolved October 25, 2002
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss.1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  ss.1350),
the  undersigned,  Robert R. Galvin,  Chief  Financial  Officer of NuCO2 Inc., a
Florida  corporation  (the  "Company"),  does hereby certify,  to his knowledge,
that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2006
of the Company (the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements  of section
13(a) or 15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  and the  information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                                /s/ Robert R. Galvin
                                                -----------------------
                                                Robert R. Galvin
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                February 9, 2007
```
IV 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 774 

Honoring the life, accomplishments, and legacy of Louis Zamperini and 

expressing condolences on his passing. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 8, 2014 

Mr. REED (for himself and Ms. WATERS) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the life, accomplishments, and legacy of Louis 

Zamperini and expressing condolences on his passing. 

Whereas Louis Silvie ‘‘Lou’’ Zamperini was born on January 

26, 1917, to Anthony and Louise Zamperini, in Olean, 

New York; 

Whereas Louis Zamperini represented the United States in 

the 1936 Olympics in Berlin as a distance runner; 

Whereas Louis Zamperini graduated from the University of 

Southern California in 1940 and enlisted in the United 

States Army Air Corps in 1941, earning the rank of lieutenant; 

Whereas in May 1943, Louis Zamperini’s B–24 bomber malfunctioned and crashed during a search-and-rescue misVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:46 Dec 08, 2014 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR774.IH HR774

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 774 IH 

sion over the Pacific Ocean, leaving him and 2 other individuals stranded; 

Whereas Louis Zamperini survived for 47 days adrift in a life 

raft with Second Lieutenant Russell Phillips before being 

captured by Japanese forces and placed in a prisoner of 

war camp; 

Whereas for more than 2 years, during his imprisonment, 

Louis Zamperini endured brutal treatment and forced 

labor with courage and resilience; 

Whereas upon the conclusion of World War II, Louis 

Zamperini was released from the prisoner of war camp 

in September 1945; 

Whereas Louis Zamperini was promoted to captain and 

awarded multiple distinguishing military honors, including the Purple Heart, the Distinguished Flying Cross, 

and the Prisoner of War Medal; 

Whereas Louis Zamperini was given the honor of carrying 

the Olympic flame in 1984, 1996, and 1998; 

Whereas in the years after World War II, Louis Zamperini 

traveled as an inspirational public speaker, using his experiences to inspire a message of forgiveness; 

Whereas the airport in Torrance, California, was named 

‘‘Zamperini Field’’ in honor of Louis Zamperini; and 

Whereas Louis Zamperini leaves a legacy as a national hero 

and an inspiration to future generations: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors the life, accomplishments, and legacy 

3 of Louis Zamperini; and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 774 IH 

1 (2) extends heartfelt sympathies and condo2 lences to the family of Louis Zamperini. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### David ROKER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-641.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 24, 1973.

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

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel D. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

*455PER CURIAM.

The appellant was found guilty of robbery by a jury; he was sentenced to twenty years in prison. The proof of appellant’s guilt was overwhelming. On this appeal, he claims error upon the court’s refusal to give one of his requested instructions. Prejudicial error is not presented by the record because (1) the substance of the instruction was adequately covered in the court’s charge; see Mackiewicz v. State, Fla.1959, 114 So.2d 684, 691; and (2) even if the refusal of the requested instruction was error it was not prejudicial error. See Hargrett v. State, Fla.App.1971, 255 So.2d 298, 299.

Affirmed.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

  

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
ICC Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-37036,
33-37037, 33-85634, 33-85636, 33-89122 and 33-89124) of our report, which
includes an explanatory paragraph which refers to conditions that raise
substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern,
dated March 20, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of
ICC Technologies, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and for the years ended
December 31, 1997, 1996, and 1995, which report is included in the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 1997. We also
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (set
forth above) of the Company of our report, dated March 20, 1998, on our audits
of the financial statements of Engelhard/ICC as of December 31, 1997 and 1996
and for the years ended Decmeber 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, which report is also
included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
December 31, 1997.




COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
April 30, 1998
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE 

### T HIRD 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS P.O. B OX 12547, A USTIN , T EXAS 78711

- 2547

(512) 463

- 1733

Date: May 17, 2013
Case Number s : 03

- 13

- 00154

- CV & 03

- 13

- 0015 5

- CV Trial Court No s .: 12

- 1288

- C277 & 12

- 0459

- T 277 Style: Carolyn Barnes v. Velocity Credit Union

You are hereby notified that appellant ’ s motion to consolidate ( in cause number 03
- 13
- 00154
- CV only ) was granted on the date noted above. Also, t he enclosed opinio n and judgment were sent this date to the following persons:

The Honorable Ken Anderson Judge, 277th District Court 405 Martin Luther King, Box 6 Georgetown, TX 78626 Mr. Mark A. Mayfield Gardere , Wynne , Sewell , L

. L

. P

. 600 Congress Avenue, Suite 3000 Austin, TX 78701 The Honorable Lisa David Williamson County District Clerk P. O. Box 24 Georgetown, TX 78627 Ms. Carolyn Barnes 419 Indian Trail Leander, TX 78641
-  Freedom of Information Act      -  Submit & Check Status of FOIA Requests 
  -  FOIA Contacts & Requester Service Centers and Privacy Act Contacts 
  -  HHS FOIA Reports        -  Annual Reports 
    -  Quarterly Reports 
    -  Chief FOIA Officer Report 
    -  Open Pending FOIA Request Reports 
  -  FOIA Library / Electronic Reading Room        -  2016/2017 HHS Presidential Transition Documents 
  -  FOIA Exemptions & Exclusions 
  -  FOIA & Privacy Act Statutes & Resources        -  The Privacy Act 
    -  HHS System of Records Notices (SORNs) 
    -  HHS Computer Matching Agreements (CMAs) 
  -  FOIA FAQS 
  -  FOIA Appeals 
  -  FOIA Fees 
  -  COVID-19 Contracts 

                      -   
                      -   
                      -   
                      -   
                      -   

# What happens after my FOIA request is received by HHS?

When HHS receives your FOIA request it is entered into the automated tracking system and assigned a control number. A FOIA analyst will review your request to understand the type(s) of records you wish to obtain and assign your request to the appropriate program office(s) to search for responsive records. You will receive an acknowledgement letter with a control number and instructions for checking the status of your request.A FOIA analyst will conduct a line-by-line review of records responsive to your request and prepare a release determination for issuance by the HHS FOIA Officer or designee.

Content last reviewed September 17, 2015
#### Kathleen POTTS, individually and as next friend of David Eugene Smith, a minor, Appellant, v. Judith K. HAYDEN et al., Appellees.

No. 71-207.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 2, 1971.

*727George 0. Kluttz, of Alderman, Johnston & Kluttz, Fort Myers, for appellant.

William H. Shields and William T. Ha-verfield, of Pavese, Shields & Garner, Fort Myers, for appellee, Judith K. Hayden.

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

MANN, Judge.

The order appealed from is not final as to these parties. It is therefore not appeal-able until after final judgment. There is no provision in F.A.R. 4.2, 32 F.S.A., for interlocutory review of a “final” summary judgment on a counterclaim while the main claim between the parties is pending. The motion to dismiss is granted without prejudice to the right of appeal from final judgment. See Midstate Hauling Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., Fla.App. 4th 1966, 189 So.2d 826.

PIERCE, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.