alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 12.1
                                                                                

                      SECURITY CAPITAL GROUP INCORPORATED
               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                        
                         (DOLLAR AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    Year Ended December 31,
                                       -------------------------------------------------
                                         1998      1997      1996     1995 (a)    1994
                                       --------  --------  ---------  ---------  -------
<S>                                    <C>       <C>       <C>        <C>        <C>
 
Net Earnings (loss) from Operations    $ 67,480  $ 38,241  $ (9,693)  $(21,274)  $11,849
Add:
  Interest Expense                       82,203   104,434   117,224    103,804    53,789
                                       --------  --------  --------   --------   -------
 
Earnings as Adjusted                   $149,683  $142,675  $107,531   $ 82,530   $65,638
                                       ========  ========  ========   ========   =======
 
Fixed Charges:
  Interest Expense                     $ 82,203  $104,434  $117,224   $103,804   $53,789
  Capitalized Interest                   26,703    69,883    11,448      4,404     3,184
                                       --------  --------  --------   --------   -------
 
  Total Fixed Charges                  $108,906  $174,317  $128,672   $108,208   $56,973
                                       ========  ========  ========   ========   =======
 
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges          1.4       0.8       0.8        0.8       1.2
                                       ========  ========  ========   ========   =======
 
</TABLE>
(a)  Excludes a one-time non-cash expense item ($158.4 million) incurred
     in acquiring the Financial Services Division from a related party.
#### James J. KOEDATICH, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44944.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 21, 1974.

Certiorari denied.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2019 (the “Report”) of New Mountain Finance Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Shiraz Y. Kajee, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | 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 Registrant.




/s/ SHIRAZ Y. KAJEEName:Shiraz Y. KajeeDate:November 6, 2019
Opinion issued February 11, 2021

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 20 - 00579 - CV

——————————— ALEX LYON & SON SALES MANAGERS AND AUCTIONEERS, INC. , Appella nt V. TRUSTMARK NATIONAL BANK , Appell e e On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 2018 - 87986
MEMORANDU M OPINION The parties, representing that they have reach a settlement, have filed a joint motion to vacate the trial court’s judgment and dismiss this appeal. The parties have filed a signed agreement. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a)(2). No opinion has issued. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(c).2

Rule 42.1 authorizes this Court to set aside the trial court ’ s judgment without regard to the merits and remand the case to the trial court for rendition of a judgment in accordance with the agreement. T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a)(2)(B); see also T EX . R. A PP . P. 43.2(d)
. Accordingly, without regard to the merits, we grant the parties’ motion, set aside the trial court’s judgment without regard to the merits and remand the case to the trial court for rendition of judgment in accordance with t he parties’ agreement. See T EX . R. A PP . P
. 42.1(a)(2)(B), 43.2(e)
. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Guerra
.
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Nicholas E. ORTIZ, Jr., Appellant, v. Don S. GENUNG, Sheriff of Pinellas County, Appellee.

No. 71-647.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 1, 1972.

Appeal dismissed.
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
  
    
    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/ Lawrence SaperLawrence SaperChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Henry M. ScaramelliHenry M. ScaramelliVice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
written consent
AND JOINT ACTION


OF
THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS


of


GLOBAL ENERGY GROUP LLC


 


Dated as of
June 30, 2013


 


 


 


THE UNDERSIGNED,
Members being the majority of the holders of the voting “Membership Interests”, of Global Energy Group LLC, a Georgia
Limited Liability Company, (the “Company”), pursuant to the laws of the State of Georgia and the Company Operating
Agreement of the Company, does hereby waive all notice of the time, place and purposes of a meeting of the Members of the Company
and does hereby adopt the resolutions set forth below and upon execution of this consent (the “Consent”), the resolutions
set forth below shall be deemed to have been adopted to the same extent and to have the same force and effect as those adopted
in a formal meeting of the Members, duly called and held for the purpose of acting upon proposals to adopt such resolutions:


 


THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
that the Members have determined that it is in their best interests to take the following actions;


 


	Acceptance of New Members into the Company: That the proposal that Metwood Inc.,
a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Nevada be accepted as a Member of the Company is hereby accepted. In accordance
with the agreements of the Members of the Company, Metwood Inc., and the Membership Interests of the Company shall henceforth be
as follows:



 


Member  Percentage
Interest


1. Rainco Management LLC 01.00%


2. Metwood Inc. 99.00%


 


 


FURTHER RESOLVED,
that “the Member” of the Company be, and is hereby authorized and directed to take all such further action and to execute,
deliver, certify and file all such instruments and documents in the name of, and on behalf of the Company, as in its judgment that
shall be necessary or advisable in order to carry out fully the intent, and to accomplish the purposes of the foregoing resolutions.


 


THIS RESOLUTION
of the Majority of the Members of Global Energy Group LLC, may be executed in more then one counterpart, each of which shall
be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one instrument.


 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the foregoing resolutions were duly adopted by the undersigned Members of the Company, as of the date first written above.





 


PREMIER EXECUTIVE TRUST


 





By: /s/ Earnest H. Delong


Name: Earnest H. Delong


Its: Trustee





 





IBADAH LIFE TRUST








 


By: /s/ Earnest H. Delong


Name: Earnest H. Delong


Its: Trustee





 


GHANIMAH HOLDINGS TRUST





 


By: /s/ Earnest H. Delong


Name: Earnest H. Delong


Its: Trustee


  


RAINCO HOLDINGS TRUST





 


By: /s/ Earnest H. Delong


Name: Earnest H. Delong


Its: Trustee





 


FALAH FAMILY TRUST





 


By: /s/ Earnest H. Delong


Name: Earnest H. Delong


Its: Trustee





 


YANG FAMILIY TRUST


 








By: /s/ Reginald Garnett


Name: Reginald Garnett


Its: Trustee





 





GRAND EXECUTIVE TRUST





 





By: /s/ Reginald Garnett


Name: Reginald Garnett


Its: Trustee
<PAGE>

                      CONSENT OF MCDONALD INVESTMENTS, INC.


    We hereby consent (i) to the use of our opinion letter to the Board of
Directors of The Somerset Group, Inc. ("Somerset") included as Annex B to the
proxy statement and prospectus relating to the transaction provided for by
that certain Agreement and Plan of Reorganization dated as of April 19, 2000,
by and between Somerset and First Indiana Corporation and (ii) to the
references to our firm and such opinion in such proxy statement and
prospectus. In giving such consent, we do not admit that we come within the
category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission thereunder, nor do we thereby admit that
we are experts with respect to any part of such Registration Statement within
the meaning of the term "experts" as used in the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, or the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange
Commission thereunder.

                                           McDONALD INVESTMENTS, INC.



April 17, 2000
#### Charles Robert BUTLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1649.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Nov. 17, 1967.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; Russell E. Seay, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.1

OFFICERS SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

Each of the undersigned officers of Income Opportunity
Realty Investors, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that:



| | (i) | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2006 fairly presents in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company, at and for the period indicated.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                                                     
|--------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 14, 2006 |  | /s/ Steven A. Abney                                 
|                      |  | Steven A. Abney                                     
|                      |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                      |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer and     
|                      |  | Acting Principal Executive Officer)
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 this Quarterly Report of Plaster Caster Inc., on Form 10-Q for the Quarter ending June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J.D. Klamka, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2012, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and June 30, 2012 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of WTTJ Corp.  August 10, 2012By:/s/ J.D. KlamkaJ.D. KlamkaChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
#### Moses K. MURRAY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 66-532.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July 12, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 5, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2014027EN.01000401.xml

| 30.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/4

---

Public holidays in 2014: EEA/EFTA States and EEA institutions

(2014/C 27/05)

| | Iceland | Liechtenstein | Norway | EFTA Surveillance Authority | EFTA Court |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 January | X | X | X | X | X |
| 2 January | | X | | X | |
| 3 January | | | | X | |
| 6 January | | X | | | |
| 2 February | | X | | | |
| 4 March | | X | | | |
| 19 March | | X | | | |
| 17 April | X | | X | | |
| 18 April | X | X | X | X | |
| 21 April | X | X | X | X | X |
| 24 April | X | | | | |
| 1 May | X | X | X | X | X |
| 17 May | | | X | | |
| 29 May | X | X | X | X | X |
| 30 May | | | | X | |
| 9 June | X | X | X | X | X |
| 17 June | X | | | | |
| 19 June | | X | | | |
| 23 June | | | | | X |
| 4 August | X | | | | |
| 15 August | | X | | | X |
| 8 September | | X | | | |
| 1 November | | X | | | X |
| 8 December | | X | | | |
| 22 December | | | | X | |
| 23 December | | | | X | |
| 24 December | | | | X | |
| 25 December | X | X | X | X | X |
| 26 December | X | X | X | X | X |
| 29 December | | | | X | |
| 30 December | | | | X | |
| 31 December | | X | | X | |

Iceland

Liechtenstein

Norway

EFTA Surveillance Authority

EFTA Court

1 January

X

X

X

X

X

2 January

X

X

3 January

X

6 January

X

2 February

X

4 March

X

19 March

X

17 April

X

X

18 April

X

X

X

X

21 April

X

X

X

X

X

24 April

X

1 May

X

X

X

X

X

17 May

X

29 May

X

X

X

X

X

30 May

X

9 June

X

X

X

X

X

17 June

X

19 June

X

23 June

X

4 August

X

15 August

X

X

8 September

X

1 November

X

X

8 December

X

22 December

X

23 December

X

24 December

X

25 December

X

X

X

X

X

26 December

X

X

X

X

X

29 December

X

30 December

X

31 December

X

X

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                      DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                            947913
<SECURITIES>                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                     1854
<ALLOWANCES>                      0
<INVENTORY>                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  955549
<PP&E>                            478360
<DEPRECIATION>                    202495
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    1242877
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             27319
<BONDS>                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0
<PREFERRED>                       0
<COMMON>                          1416908
<OTHER-SE>                        (201350)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      1242877
<SALES>                           0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  104917
<CGS>                             0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  100496
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                1616
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   2805
<INCOME-TAX>                      9550
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (6745)
<DISCONTINUED>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0
<CHANGES>                         0
<NET-INCOME>                      (6745)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                     .00


</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-1621

___________________________ United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee ,

v. Donna Jenkins, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant .

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Central

____________ Submitted: July 19, 2023 Filed: August 2, 2023 [Unpublished]

____________ Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. Donna Jenkins appeals a sentence imposed by the district court 1 after Jenkins pleaded guilty to a drug offense. Her counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of

the sentence. Upon careful review, we conclude that Jenkins’s sentence was not unreasonable. There is no indication that the district court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors. See United States v. Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
<PAGE>

                                                             Exhibit 23.2



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
Wave Systems Corp.


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this registration statement
on Form S-3 of Wave Systems Corp. of our report dated March 10, 2000,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Wave Systems Corp. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficiency) and other
comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 1999 and for the period from February 12, 1988
(date of inception) to December 31, 1999, which report appears in the
December 31, 1999 annual report on Form 10-K of Wave Systems Corp.



Boston, Massachusetts
September 18, 2000
#### Misao CHORD, Appellant, v. Robert CHORD, Appellee.

No. 68-29.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

April 23, 1968.

*282Jepeway & Gassen, Miami, for appellant.

Anthony F. Barone, Miami, for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We are presented with an interlocutory appeal from an order denying appellant’s petition for modification of the alimony and child support provisions of a divorce decree. The appellant is the former wife of the defendant. They were divorced in March of 1963 and appellant was awarded alimony of $250 per month, $50 per month for each of two children or a total of $350 per month in alimony and support.

The appellee has not filed a brief on this appeal, nor has he supplemented the record presented. The record consists of excerpts from the final decree, the petition for modification, the order appealed and excerpts from the transcript of the testimony taken at the hearing, together with exhibits. Upon this record it affirmatively appears that there has been a change in the circumstances of the appellant and of the appel-lee. Appellee’s salary has substantially increased and appellant’s needs and expenses have increased. In addition it is clear that appellee’s increase in earning capacity is not temporary, inasmuch as it consists of salary as a pilot with an established airline. The increase in the needs of the appellant for child support is apparent, not only in increased costs testified to, but in the increased needs of the minor children. The children were two and five years old at the time of the final decree and were seven and ten years of age at the time of the hearing.

A petition to modify an award of alimony made in a final decree of divorce will not be granted except upon a showing in change of circumstances. Conversely, it may not be denied when the change is clearly shown. See Villas v. Villas, 1943, 153 Fla. 102, 13 So.2d 807; Simon v. Simon, Fla.App. 1963, 155 So.2d 849. Cf. Terry v. Terry, Fla.App.1961, 126 So.2d 890; Harrell v. Harrell, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 214.

Having reached the conclusion that error has been demonstrated, we refrain from discussing the amounts of the award but reverse the order with directions to the trial judge to enter an order increasing the alimony and child support in such an amount as in his sound discretion, justice and equity require. Cf. Howard v. Howard, Fla.App. 1960, 118 So.2d 90.

Reversed and remanded.
#### RASBERRY AND CLARKE COMPANY, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 7316.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Dec. 19, 1967.

William T. Kivett, Philip K. Jones and Norman L. Sisson, Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Joseph H. Kavanaugh, of Kavanaugh & Pierson, Baton Rouge, for Louisiana Paving Co., Inc.

Chappuis & Beslin, Rayne, for Rasberry & Clarke Co., Inc.

Before LOTTINGER, SARTAIN and ELLIS, JJ.

SARTAIN, Judge.

For reasons stated in the opinion handed down this date in Louisiana Paving Company, Inc. v. Louisiana, Department of Highways, La.App., 205 So.2d 445, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Affirmed.