alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of VR Holdings, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2011, I, John E. Baker, Chief Financial Officer of VR Holdings, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.

Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2011, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of VR Holdings, Inc.

Dated: June 30, 2011.





/s/ John E. Baker

John E. Baker, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of VR Holdings, Inc.
Exhibit



EXHIBIT 10.28


SUMMARY OF DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
OF
AMERIGAS PROPANE, INC. 
(the General Partner of AmeriGas Partners, L.P.)


The table below shows the components of director compensation effective October 1, 2016.  A director who is an officer or employee of the Registrant or its subsidiaries is not compensated for service on the Board of Directors or on any Committee of the Board.  




CASH        EQUITY
COMPONENT        COMPONENT 


		
	Annual Retainer
	$75,000        1,400 Phantom Units 


(Representing 
AmeriGas Partners, L.P.
Common Units to be
awarded in January 2017).
Additional Annual Retainer for
Audit Committee Members 
(other than the Chairperson)         $10,000


Additional Annual Retainer for 
Audit Committee Chairperson        $15,000


Additional Annual Retainer for         
Corporate Governance
Committee Chairperson              $  7,500


Additional Annual Retainer for
Compensation/Pension Committee
Chairperson                $  7,500


Additional Annual Retainer for
Presiding Director                $15,000
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3126

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to convey vessels to Assistance

International, Inc. (a nonprofit corporation).

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 23, 1993

Ms. CANTWELL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to convey vessels to Assistance International, Inc. (a nonprofit corporation).

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

3 SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE TO ASSISTANCE INTER4 NATIONAL.

5 (a) CONVEYANCE.—Notwithstanding any other law,

6 the Secretary of Transportation may convey, without com7 pensation and by not later than September 30, 1996, all

8 right, title, and interest of the United States Government

9 in and to the vessels L.S.T. TIOGA COUNTY, R.V.

10 LYNCH, and L.S.T. LORRAINE COUNTY, including
2

•HR 3126 IH

1 related spare parts and vessel equipment, to the nonprofit

2 corporation Assistance International, Inc. (hereinafter in

3 this section referred to as the ‘‘recipient’’), for use in

4 emergencies, vocational training, and economic develop5 ment programs.

6 (b) CONDITIONS.—As a condition of any vessel con7 veyance under this section, the recipient shall agree—

8 (1) to use the vessel solely for nonprofit activi9 ties;

10 (2) to not use the vessel for commercial trans11 portation purposes in competition with any United

12 States-flag vessel;

13 (3) to make the vessel available to the Govern14 ment whenever use of the vessel is required by the

15 Government;

16 (4) that, whenever the recipient no longer re17 quires the use of the vessel for its nonprofit activi18 ties, the recipient shall—

19 (A) at the discretion of the Secretary,

20 reconvey the vessel to the Government in as

21 good a condition as when it was received from

22 the Government, except for ordinary wear and

23 tear; and
3

•HR 3126 IH

1 (B) deliver the vessel to the Government at

2 the place where the vessel was delivered to the

3 recipient;

4 (5) to hold the Government harmless for any

5 claim arising after conveyance of the vessel, except

6 for claims against the Government arising during

7 the use of the vessel by the Government under para8 graph (3) or (4); and

9 (6) to any other conditions the Secretary con10 siders appropriate.

11 (c) DELIVERY.—The Secretary shall deliver each ves12 sel conveyed under this section to the recipient—

13 (1) at the place where the vessel is located on

14 the date of enactment of this Act;

15 (2) in its condition on July 25, 1991, except for

16 ordinary wear and tear occurring after that date;

17 and

18 (3) without cost to the Government.

Æ
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that

have no pre cedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 95-40249

_____________________

IN THE MATTER OF: WILLIAM CHRISTOPHER REID AND JULIE CHRISTINE REID, Debtors.
WILLIAM CHRISTOPHER REID, ET AL., Appellants,

versus
MICHAEL GROSS, Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas (1:94-CV-538)

_________________________________________________________________ December 11, 1995 Before JOLLY, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The holding of the district court, In re Reid , 179 B.R. 504 (E.D. Tex. 1995), affirming the decision of the bankruptcy judge,
is affirmed. We attach the district court's opinion as Appendix A. Having reviewed the record, studied the briefs, and listened to the
arguments of the parties, we are not convinced that the district court committed reversible error. We write briefly today only to emphasize that In re Foster , 670 F.2d 478 (5th Cir. 1982), stands-2-

clearly for the princip le that the bankruptcy court has broad
discretion in determining whe ther a debtor may act as disbursing
agent in place of the trustee, thereby avoiding the Chapter 13

trustee's fees. F oster , 670 F.2d at 486. Although F oster recognizes that the debtor should have flexibility in formulating
Chapter 13 plans, id. , we find no error in the bankruptcy court's rejection of the proposed, amended plan, which, in this instance,
included a modification of First Bank and Trust's original loan to the debtors. The judgment of the district court is therefore

A F F I R M E D.
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3356

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under

Jr., United States Courthouse’’.Charles, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Edwin Ford Hunter,construction at 611 Broad Street, in Lake
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3356

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 611 Broad Street, in Lake Charles, Louisiana,

as the ‘‘Edwin Ford Hunter, Jr., United States Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States courthouse under construction at

5 611 Broad Street, in Lake Charles, Louisiana, shall be

6 known and designated as the ‘‘Edwin Ford Hunter, Jr.,

7 United States Courthouse’’.
2

HR 3356 EH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the court4 house referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a ref5 erence to the ‘‘Edwin Ford Hunter, Jr., United States

6 Courthouse’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 15,

1993.

Attest:

Clerk.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 22

- 1274

_____________________________
H ARRIS W ALKER , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Gadsden County

. Robert R. Wheeler , Judge

. September 28, 2022

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
L EWIS , M AKAR , and B ILBREY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Harris Walker, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General; David Welch and Julian E. Markham, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
Exhibit 32.1Certification of Chief Executive 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 Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the period ended July 29, 2006:In connection with the Annual Report of Del Global Technologies Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ended July 29, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, James A. Risher, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002that to my knowledge:     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.         /s/ James A. Risher       Name: James A. Risher      Title: Chief Executive Officer      Date: October 27, 2006         (1) A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toDel Global Technologies Corp and will be retained by Del Global Technologies Corp. and furnished tothe 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 notbeing filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Petty, AtLee and Senior Judge Clements 

THE FRESH MARKET AND 

 XL INSURANCE AMERICA, INC. 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0608-16-4 PER CURIAM 

 AUGUST 9, 2016 

HANY M. MANKARUOS 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (William B. Pierce, Jr.; Dov M. Szego; William B. Pierce & 

Associates, PLLC, on briefs), for appellants. 

 

 (Joseph T. Trapeni, Jr., on brief), for appellee. 

 The Fresh Market ANDXL Insurance America, Inc. (collectively employer) appeal a 

decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission awarding Hany Mankaruos (claimant) 

medical benefits and two closed periods of temporary total disability benefits. On appeal, 

employer contends the Commission erred in (1) finding that the evidence was sufficient to 

support claimant’s assertions; (2) finding claimant’s April 15, 2015 claim for benefits alleged a 

back injury as a result of his April 6, 2015 work-related accident; (3) finding claimant bore his 

burden of proving his back complaints were related to his April 6, 2015 work-related accident; 

(4) overlooking the deputy commissioner’s finding that there had been no treatment of 

claimant’s back complaints concerning his April 6, 2015 work-related accident; (5) finding 

claimant bore his burden of proving disability concerning his work-related accident after 

September 22, 2015; (6) finding claimant was not released to work after September 22, 2015 

with respect to his compensable hernia and leg injury; (7) failing to find claimant missed 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 

UNPUBLISHED 
- 2 - 

scheduled medical appointments when he left the country for more than three months; (8) failing 

to find claimant refused medical treatment when he left the country for more than three months 

while treatment was incomplete and ongoing; and (9) imposing on it a duty to prove claimant 

violated medical restrictions while he was out of the country. 

 We have reviewed the record and the Commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is 

without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Commission in its final 

opinion. See Fresh Market v. Mankaruos, VWC File No. VA00001052383 (Mar. 21, 2016). We 

dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

 Affirmed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3278

To increase the minimum wage and to deny employers a deduction for

payments of excessive compensation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 13, 1993

Mr. SABO introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to the

Committee on Ways and Means and Education and Labor

A BILL

To increase the minimum wage and to deny employers a

deduction for payments of excessive compensation.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Income Equity Act

5 of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN MINIMUM WAGE.

7 Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of

8 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) is amended by striking out

9 ‘‘and not less than $4.25 an hour after March 31, 1991’’

10 and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘not less than $4.25 an hour
2

•HR 3278 IH

1 until the 90th day after the date of the enactment of the

2 Minimum Wage Amendments of 1993, and not less than

3 $6.50 an hour after the 90th day after such date’’.

4 SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR PAYMENTS OF EXCES5 SIVE COMPENSATION.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 162 of the Internal Reve7 nue Code of 1986 (relating to deduction for trade or busi8 ness expenses) is amended by inserting after subsection

9 (h) the following new subsection:

10 ‘‘(i) EXCESSIVE COMPENSATION.—

11 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—No deduction shall be al12 lowed under this chapter for any excessive com13 pensation with respect to any full-time employee.

14 ‘‘(2) EXCESSIVE COMPENSATION.—For pur15 poses of this subsection, the term ‘excessive com16 pensation’ means, with respect to any employee, the

17 amount by which—

18 ‘‘(A) the compensation for services per19 formed by such employee during the taxable

20 year, exceeds

21 ‘‘(B) an amount equal to 25 times the low22 est compensation for services performed by any

23 other employee during such taxable year.

24 ‘‘(3) DEFINITIONS AND SPECIAL RULES.—For

25 purposes of this subsection—
3

•HR 3278 IH

1 ‘‘(A) COMPENSATION.—

2 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘com3 pensation’ means salary, wages, and bo4 nuses.

5 ‘‘(ii) PART-YEAR EMPLOYEES.—In the

6 case of any part-year employee, the com7 pensation of the employee shall be com8 puted on an annualized basis.

9 ‘‘(B) EMPLOYER.—All persons treated as a

10 single employer under subsection (a) or (b) of

11 section 52 or subsection (m) or (o) of section

12 414 shall be treated as 1 employer.’’

13 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

14 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

15 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### In re FLORIDA PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP RULES.

No. 37079.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 19, 1968.

June 19, 1968.

William P. Simmons, Jr., as President, and Henry P. Trawick, Jr., as Chairman, Florida Court Rules Committee.

PER CURIAM.

The Florida Probate and Guardianship Rules are hereby amended in the following respects, viz.:

Rule 5.150(b), (c) and (d) are amended to read:

> “(b) No caveat is effective unless it contains a statement of the interest of the caveator in the estate, the name and specific residence address of the caveator, and, if the caveator is not a state agency and is a non-resident of the county, the additional name and specific residence address of a person residing in the county, designated as the agent of the caveator, on whom service of citation may be made. After the filing of a caveat by an heir or distributee, the court shall not admit the will of the decedent to probate without issuance of a citation to the caveator. Ca-veators who are creditors in testate and intestate estate, shall receive notice as provided in subdivision (e).

> “(c) The citation shall be served either on the caveator or on his agent named in the caveat for service of citation, whoever is stated to be a resident of the county. On a return that after diligent search the cave-ator, if he is a resident, or his resident agent if the caveator is a non-resident, cannot be found, the court may admit the will to probate on the expiration of fifteen days after mailing copies of the citation and petition to the caveator and to his agent, if any is named in the caveat, at the respective residence addresses given. A certificate of mailing shall be filed in such instances by the court.

> “(d) On the return day of the citation, the caveator may answer the petition for probate. In his answer he shall state his interest in the estate and the facts constituting the grounds on which probate of the will is opposed; and on the issue made and proof adduced the court shall probate the will or deny probate.”

These amendments shall become effective midnight, September 30, 1968, and from that date shall apply to all probate and guardianship proceedings then pending or thereafter filed.

CALDWELL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL, ERVIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Anthony ESPERTI, Relator, v. The Honorable J. H. WILLSON, Judge of the Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit in and for Polk County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 71-713.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 8, 1971.

Prohibition denied.
<PAGE>


               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this registration statement of our reports dated January 20,
2000, except with respect to certain information in Note M as to which the
date is March 8, 2000 and Note N as to which the date is May 31, 2000 included
in Lone Star Technologies, Inc. Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31,
1999 and to all references to our Firm included in this registration statement.



Dallas, Texas
  September 19, 2000



<PAGE>


                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this registration statement of our report on the consolidated
financial statements of Fintube Limited Partnership, dated February 4, 2000
included in Lone Star Technologies, Inc. Form 8-K, as amended, dated June 1,
2000 and to all references to our Firm included in this registration
statement.



Tulsa, Oklahoma
  September 19, 2000
No. 00-7306.

#### Goffney *v.*Family Savings and Loan Assn. et al.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED OC TOBER 23, 2015

NO. 03

- 14

- 00181

- CV

Furie Petroleum Co., LL C; Furie Operating Alaska, LLC; Cornucopia Oil & Gas Co., LLC f/k/a Escopeta Oil of Alaska; and Kay Rieck, Appellant s

v.

Ben Barnes Group, L.P., Appellee

APPEAL FROM 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PE MBERTON, AND FIELD

REVERSED AND RENDERED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the tr i a l court on March 5, 2014. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible error in

the order . Therefore, the Court reverses t he trial court’s interlocutory order denying appellant

Rieck’s special appearance and renders judgment dismissing appellee’s claims against appellant

Rieck. A ppellee shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
December 2 7 , 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management Sy stem 1200 New Jersey

Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590 Re: Docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0855, Petition for Amendment to Exemption No. 11185, Commonwealth Edison Dear Sir or Madam: Commonwealth Edison (“ComEd”) hereb y requests an amendment to the FAA Exemption No. 11185, Docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0855, to allow the following:  The use of the below listed unmanned aircraft s ys tem s (“UAS”), in addition to the alread y approved for use DJIS900 o Aery on Sky

ranger o Lockheed Indago o DJIInspire I o DJIPhantom 3 o Phy sical Sciences Instant Ey e o Sensefly

Exom The DJ I S900 authorized in the original grant, though larger, is comparable in size, weight, speed and operating capabilities to those listed above and the primary subject of this petition. The FAA previousl y determined the airworthiness of the Aeryon Skyr anger in Exemption No. 11239 (Southern Company Services, Inc. ). The FAA previousl y determined the airworthiness of the L ockheed Indago in Exemption No. 11965 ( Aerialspecs, Inc.)

. The FAA previously determined the airworthiness of the DJ I Inspire I in Exemption No. 11965 (Aerialspecs, Inc.). The FAA previousl y determined the airworthine ss of the DJ I Phantom 3 in Exemption No. 11965 (Aerialspecs, Inc.). The FAA previousl y determined the airworthiness of the Physical Sciences Instant E ye in Exemption No. 11238 ( San Diego Gas & Electric Company). The FAA previously

determined the airworth iness of the Sensefly Exom in Exemption No. 12284 ( Flight Ventures Ltd. ). All operations of the additional UASs will be in full compliance with the terms of our current FAA Exemption No. 11185 (the “Exemption” ). All applicable sections of the Exemption will need to be modified to include the above listed UASs. The description of the operating documents will also need to be modified to include the listed UASs. Other than the addition of the aircraft and the operating documents, there will be no change in the conditions and reasons relative to emplo yee and public safet y that were the basis for the initial grant of exemption. Technical manuals for the additional aircraft have already been submitted in connection with the FAA’s previous airworthiness dete rminations. Since the requested amendment to ComEd’s exemption would not set any precedent or raise an y novel issue, and because Peti tioner seeks to begin these operations without delay , ComEdrespectfull y requests the FAA to determine that good cause exi sts to dispense with publication of

the summary

of this petition in the Federal Register and grant the requested amendment expeditiously

by summary means. Based on the foregoing, Petitioner hereb y requests that the FAA grant this amendment and provide suc h further relief as deemed appropriate for the operations proposed herein. Feel free to contact me with any questions y ou may

have.
Yours in Safet y, Linda G. Rhodes, CSP (Certified Safet y Professional) Commonwealth Edison
**Exhibit 32.2**
**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**
I, Amy Vidrine Samson, Chief Financial Officer of Crown Crafts, Inc. (the“Company”), do hereby certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to myknowledge:
1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the period endingMarch 28, 2004 (the “Periodic Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 15 U.S.C. §§78m or 78o(d); and 2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.
Dated: June 28, 2004         /s/ Amy Vidrine Samson   Amy Vidrine Samson, Chief Financial Officer