alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
GMAC
COMMERCIAL CREDIT LLC
1290 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS - NEW YORK, NY 10104
212-408-7000

September 3, 1999

World Airways, Inc.
13873 Park Center Road, Suite 490
Herndon, VA 22071

Gentlemen:

Reference is made to the Restated and Amended Accounts Receivable Management and
Security Agreement in effect between us with an effective date of March 23,
1998, as supplemented and amended from time to time (the "Agreement"). Initially
capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such
terms in the Agreement.

It is hereby agreed by and between us that effective, as of the date hereof, the
Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

Exhibit X to the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the following phrase:
"1. MD11 spare parts and engines, except those listed on the Spare Parts
Eligible Inventory Form.", and replacing it with the following phrase "1. MD11
spare parts and engines, except those listed on the monthly Spare Parts Eligible
Inventory Form submitted monthly by the Borrower to the Lender" pursuant to the
Agreement.

Except as herein specifically amended, the Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect in accordance with its original terms, except as previously amended.

If the foregoing accurately reflects our understanding, kindly sign the enclosed
copy of this letter and return it to our office as soon as practicable.

Very truly yours,
GMAC COMMERCIAL CREDIT LLC
(successor by merger to BNY FINANCIAL CORPORATION)

By:      ___________________
Title:   ___________________


AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
WORLD AIRWAYS, INC.
By:      ___________________
Title:   ___________________
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Chelsea Therapeutics International, Ltd. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, Simon Pedder, President and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to 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 results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods
presented in the Report.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Simon PedderSimon PedderPresident and Chief Executive OfficerNovember 13, 2007
#### In the Matter of Britton Realty Co., Appellant, v State Division of Housing and Community Renewal et al., Respondents.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Greenfield, J.), entered on April 9, 1990, which denied and dismissed petitioner’s application, pursuant to CPLR article 78, challenging a final order of the respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) unanimously affirmed, without costs.

DHCR followed proper guidelines in determining the lawful rent of the subject apartment on the basis of the lowest stabilized rent in the same line without guidelines adjustment (Code of Rent Stabilization Association of New York City, Inc. § 42 [A]). Because the landlord contended that this provision had been improperly applied, the issue of whether or not the base rent should be set without guidelines adjustments was properly before DHCR on the petition for administrative review.

The landlord was properly held in default for failure to produce rent records prior to April 1, 1984. Petitioner’s request that this court overrule its determination in *Matter of Lavanant v State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal*(148 AD2d 185) is rejected. *(Matter of Jemrock Realty Co. v State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*169 AD2d 679.)

We have reviewed the petitioner’s other arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

Directorate Identifier: 201 2

- NM

- 0 33

- AD

**Costs:** Labor per airplane ( 3 work hours x $8 5 /hour) $ 255 Parts per airplane $ + 0 Cost per airplane $ 255 Number of U.S.

- registered airplanes x 6 01 Total fleet cost $ 153,255

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act :**  Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 23


                                                                        DELOITTE
                                                                        & TOUCHE

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 33-98440, 33-98444, 33-98442, 33-98446, 333-21799, 333-21795, 333-70599,
333-35812, 333-35814, and 333-50322) on Form S-8 and the Registration Statements
(Nos. 333-94757 and 333-50494) on Form S-3 of CheckFree Corporation of our
reports dated August 3, 2001, appearing in and incorporated by reference in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of CheckFree Corporation for the year ended June 30,
2001.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
September 26, 2001
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00369-CV

HV, LLC d/b/a Circo Hermanos Vasquez, Aurora Entertainment Marketing, LLC, Ramon 

Vasquez, Jose Vasquez, Aldo Vasquez, Jesus Vasquez Guillermo 'Memo' Vasquez

v.

Raciel Juarez, S2DIO HVAC, LLC, and Carrigan & Anderson, PLLC

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 4 of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2018CCV-60961-4

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 7, 2021
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




In
      connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Edgemont
      Resources Corp. for the quarter ended January 31, 2006, I certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:





|(1) | the
              Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Edgemont Resources Corp. for the
              quarter ended January 31, 2006 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
              quarter ended January 31, 2006, fairly presents in all material respects,
              the financial condition and results of operations of Edgemont Resources
              Corp..
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




By:
            /s/
                William IversenName:
            William
                IversenTitle:
            Principal
                Executive Officer,
              Principal
                Financial Officer and DirectorDate:
            March
                14, 2006
---

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 undersigned, James B. Hersch, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

(1)          
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Century Petroleum Corp. for the quarterly
period ended January 31, 2008 (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 operations of Century Petroleum
Corp.

Dated: March 24, 2008



/s/ James B. Hersch
  James B. Hersch 
  President and Director 
  (Principal Executive Officer)





A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Century
Petroleum Corp. and will be retained by Century Petroleum Corp. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
TransPro, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 33-80871) of our reports dated February 13,
1997, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedule of TransPro, Inc. as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and for
the years ended December 31, 1996, 1995, and 1994, which reports are
incorporated by reference and included respectively in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.



Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
Hartford, Connecticut
March 26, 1997
Epidemiologic results presented in Tolbert et al. (2007) 

Reference: Tolbert, P. E.; Klein, M.; Peel, J. L.; Sarnat, S. E.; Sarnat, J. A.(2007) Multipollutant modeling 

issues in a study of ambient air quality and emergency department visits in Atlanta. J Exposure Sci 

Environ Epidemiol. 17(Suppl. 2s): S29-S35. 

Tables 1 and 2 present the risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals as presented in Figures 1 and 2 in 

Tolbert et al. (2007), including specification of the IQRs used in estimating the risk ratios. 

Table 1. Effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals for selected multipollutant models for 

combined cardiovascular diseases group, 1998–2004, corresponding to Figure 1 of Tolbert et al. 

(2007). 

Models Pollutant(s) IQR RR per IQR (95% CI) 

 

Single-pollutant CO 1.22 ppm 1.031 (1.016-1.046) 

 NO2 23 ppb 1.015 (1.002-1.029) 

 PM2.5 TC 3.63 μg/m3

1.017 (1.007-1.028) 

 

Two-pollutant CO 1.22 ppm 1.035 (1.016-1.056) 

 NO2 23 ppb 0.994 (0.977-1.012) 

 

 CO 1.22 ppm 1.026 (1.007-1.046) 

 PM2.5 TC 3.63 μg/m31.005 (0.991-1.019) 

 

 NO2 23 ppb 0.999 (0.980-1.018) 

 PM2.5 TC 3.63 μg/m31.018 (1.003-1.033) 

 

Three-pollutant CO 1.22 ppm 1.031 (1.010-1.052) 

 NO2 23 ppb 0.988 (0.969-1.008) 

 PM2.5 TC 3.63 μg/m3

1.009 (0.994-1.025) 

Table 2. Effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals for selected multipollutant models for 

combined respiratory diseases group, 1993–2004, corresponding to Figure 2 of Tolbert et al. 

(2007). 

Models Pollutant(s) IQR RR per IQR (95% CI) 

 

Single-pollutant CO 1.22 ppm 1.015 (1.005-1.024) 

 NO2 23 ppb 1.020 (1.010-1.029) 

 PM10 16.30 μg/m31.025 (1.016-1.035) 

 O3 34.38 ppb 1.044 (1.028-1.059) 

 

Two-pollutant CO 1.22 ppm 1.004 (0.992-1.016) 

 NO2 23 ppb 1.017 (1.006-1.029) 

 

 CO 1.22 ppm 1.004 (0.993-1.014) 

 PM10 16.30 μg/m31.024 (1.014-1.034) 

 
 CO 1.22 ppm 1.009 (0.999-1.019) 

 O3 34.38 ppb 1.040 (1.024-1.056) 

 

 NO2 23 ppb 1.007 (0.996-1.018) 

 PM10 16.30 μg/m31.021 (1.010-1.033) 

 

 NO2 23 ppb 1.010 (0.999-1.020) 

 O3 34.38 ppb 1.036 (1.019-1.054) 

 

 PM10 16.30 μg/m31.016 (1.006-1.027) 

 O3 34.38 ppb 1.028 (1.010-1.047) 

 

Three-pollutant NO2 23 ppb 1.004 (0.992-1.015) 

 PM10 16.30 μg/m31.015 (1.003-1.027) 

 O3 34.38 ppb 1.027 (1.009-1.046)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eugene C. Lorick, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), rendered April 3, 1989, convicting defendant after non-jury trial of robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him to concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of 4 *Vi*to 9 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was previously granted a new trial because the trial court erroneously submitted written instructions to the jury. *(People v Lorick,*142 AD2d 501, *appeal withdrawn*73 NY2d 785.) We also suppressed the complainant’s stationhouse showup identification of defendant, directing an independent source hearing before the case was retried. On remand, at the conclusion of the hearing testimony, the court opined that it was unnecessary to make a ruling, because the complainant could not make an in-court identification, just as he had failed to do at the first trial. In compliance with this court’s order, Criminal Term nevertheless ruled that the People had failed to establish by fair and convincing evidence that the opjSbrtunity for observation was sufficient to sustain an in-court identification of defendant.

At trial, as at the probable cause hearing, the complainant testified that he was robbed at gunpoint at 8:20 p.m. on January 14, 1986. The incident lasted a matter of seconds. After turning over his wallet to the gunman who faced him, the complainant fled to a midtown bus terminal. There, he reported the robbery to two police officers, who immediately took up pursuit. When the complainant reached a subway exit, he identified defendant and his companion, who were surrounded by police officers. The complainant testified that he recognized defendant, who wore the same clothing as he had minutes earlier.

Defendant’s conviction was not against the weight of the evidence. *(People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490.) In particular, there was no inconsistency between defendant’s conviction and Criminal Term’s earlier ruling that there was no independent source for the precinct showup identification. A finding that an identification witness would not recognize the accused *419at the time of trial, had the intervening identification procedure not occurred, does not preclude a determination that all of the circumstances surrounding the crime can establish beyond a reasonable doubt that an out of court identification was reliable. Indeed, the very reason for permitting prompt on-the-scene showups is that the procedures take place when a witness’s ability to make an identification is "as fresh and reliable” as possible. *(People v Blake,*35 NY2d 331, 337.) Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Wallach, Ross and Kassal, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joey Abney, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weissman, J.), rendered March 30, 1988, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial (Copertino, J.), after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to the police.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt of depraved indifference murder beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant admitted that after an argument with his elderly uncle he went into a rage during which he repeatedly hit his uncle in the face and head with an axe. Additionally, the medical examiner testified that the victim had been stomped on and kicked while on the ground. The jury was thus entitled to find that the defendant created a grave risk of the victim’s death and caused his death under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life *(see,*Penal Law § 125.25 [2]; *People v Roe,*74 NY2d 20; *People v Rammelkamp,*167 AD2d 560). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [2]).

We find unpersuasive the defendant’s claim that the incul*546patory statements he made to police at a precinct and at the homicide squad office were obtained in violation of his constitutional rights. It is well settled that the factual determinations of a hearing court are to be accorded great deference on appeal and will not be set aside unless they are unsupported by the evidence *(see generally, People v Perry,*144 AD2d 706, 706-707). We discern no basis for disturbing the conclusions of the hearing court in this case, as the record amply supports its findings that the defendant was not in custody at the time a detective conducted investigatory questioning at the precinct and that the defendant’s statements at the homicide squad office were preceded by a valid waiver of his *Miranda*rights. Accordingly, suppression of those statements was properly denied *(see, People v Hurley,*154 AD2d 617, 618).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Kooper, J. P., Sullivan, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur. *[See,*135 Misc 2d 797.]
# L_2006093EN.01006201.xml

| 31.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 93/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 93/62

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 530/2006

of 30 March 2006

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 24 to 30 March 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 31 March 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 March 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 15.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

3

---
EX-4.6



 




Exhibit 4.6



CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

OF

PNC CAPITAL TRUST H,

A DELAWARE STATUTORY TRUST



     This Certificate of Trust of PNC Capital Trust H (the “Trust”) is being duly executed and
filed for the purpose of forming a statutory trust pursuant to the Delaware Statutory Trust Act 12
Del. Code §3801, et seq.



     1.   NAME. The name of the statutory trust formed hereby is PNC Capital Trust H.



     2.   DELAWARE TRUSTEE. The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust having its
principal place of business in the State of Delaware are:


The Bank of New York (Delaware)

White Clay Center

Route 273

Newark, DE 19711




     3.   EFFECTIVE DATE. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective immediately upon filing in
the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the sole trustee of the Trust, does hereby execute
this Certificate of Trust as of the 9 day of January, 2007.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	THE BANK OF NEW YORK (DELAWARE),

not in its individual capacity but solely as Delaware

Trustee

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/
Kristine K. Gullo	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Title 	Vice
President
# L_2006095DE.01001202.xml

| 4.4.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 95/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 95/12

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 522/2006 der Kommission vom 30. März 2006 zur Festsetzung der Ausfuhrerstattungen für Milch und Milcherzeugnisse

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 93 vom 31. März 2006
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 93 vom 31. März 2006

Seite 49, Fußnote 1 der Tabelle:

anstatt:

| „a) | Erzeugnisse der KN-Codes 040210199000 und 040210199000“ |
| --- | --- |

„a)

Erzeugnisse der KN-Codes 040210199000 und 040210199000“

muss es heißen:

| „a) | Erzeugnisse der KN-Codes 040210119000 und 040210199000“ |
| --- | --- |

„a)

Erzeugnisse der KN-Codes 040210119000 und 040210199000“

---