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

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 376

Recognizing ironworkers for their service in the rescue and recovery efforts

in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks against the United States

on September 11, 2001.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 15, 2002

Mr. LYNCH submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Government Reform

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing ironworkers for their service in the rescue and

recovery efforts in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks

against the United States on September 11, 2001.

Whereas thousands of Americans and citizens of other nations perished in the terrorist attacks against the United

States on September 11, 2001;

Whereas many police officers, firemen, and other emergency

rescue workers also perished or were injured in their heroic efforts to save people at the site of the World Trade

Center in New York City, and also worked in the rescue

and recovery efforts at the Pentagon in Virginia, just

outside Washington, D.C.;
2

•HCON 376 IH

Whereas the rescue operations also involved thousands of

union ironworkers who performed rescue and recovery

duties, particularly in New York City;

Whereas these men and women performed their duties at serious risk to their health and welfare and many suffered

injuries during the rescue and recovery process; and

Whereas these men and women were an important component

of the larger rescue and recovery efforts: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that—

3 (1) thousands of union ironworkers from New

4 York City, and across North America, were instru5 mental in the emergency response operations in New

6 York City and Virginia in the aftermath of the ter7 rorist attacks on the United States on September

8 11, 2001;

9 (2) by risking their lives in the recovery effort

10 these men and women embodied the true American

11 spirit;

12 (3) these brave men and women endured ex13 haustion, exposure to noxious fumes and active fires,

14 risks from falling debris and collapses, and other

15 hazards during the rescue and recovery efforts; and
3

•HCON 376 IH

1 (4) the Nation owes a debt of gratitude for the

2 service given by these men and women of the Iron

3 Workers International Union.

Æ
EXHIBIT 10.3

                     INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC.

                   2000 LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLAN AGREEMENT

                                   "O" PLAN

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

[Name]
[Address]

[ID]

Pursuant to the ISP 2000 Long Term Incentive Plan (the "Plan"), you are hereby
awarded Incentive Units as follows:

         Award No.                             [Number]

         Award Date                            [Date]

         Vesting Schedule                      20%   [Award Date +1 year]
                                               40%   [Award Date +2 years]
                                               60%   [Award Date +3 years]
                                               80%   [Award Date +4 years]
                                               100%  [Award Date +5 years]

         Expiration Date                       [Award Date +6 years]

         Total Number of Units Awarded         [Number]

         Book Value                            [$  .  ]
                                                 -- --

Enclosed please find the ISP 2000 Long Term Incentive Plan Document, and an
Exercise Form, which you may use to exercise the units when they become
exercisable.

If you have any questions regarding this award, please call Richard Irwin in
Corporate Human Resources.


-----------------------------------------                    ---------------
For International Specialty Products Inc.                          Date
**Exhibit 15**

August 10, 2006

GFI Group Inc.100 Wall StreetNew York, New York

We have made a review, in accordance with thestandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), ofthe unaudited interim financial information of GFI Group Inc. and subsidiariesfor the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, asindicated in our report dated August 10, 2006; because we did not performan audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, whichis included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterended June 30, 2006, is being incorporated by reference in RegistrationStatement No. 333-122905 on Form S-8.

We also are aware that theaforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the SecuritiesAct of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statements preparedor certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by anaccountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLPNew York, New York

----
#### Patricia P. McDONALD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby E. McDONALD, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 80CA1158.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. II.

Sept. 10, 1981.

*1032Robert R. Gallagher, Jr., Dist. Atty. for Arapahoe County, Patrick J. Delaney, Deputy Dist. Atty., Littleton, for petitioner-appellant.

No appearance for respondent-appellee.

PIERCE, Judge.

The petitioner-mother appeals a judgment entered pursuant to the Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, § 14-5-101, et seq., C.R.S.1973 (1980 Cum.Supp.). We reverse in part and affirm in part.

In 1964 the parties were divorced in Oklahoma and the father was ordered to pay child support in the amount of $50 per month to the mother for their child, Gary, born May 15, 1962. From June 19, 1964, until March of 1977, the father has resided in Oklahoma, and, since March 1977, has resided in Colorado. The mother has resided in Texas with Gary since 1964.

The mother instituted this action by filing a petition for support in 1979 in Texas. Service was obtained on the father in Colorado. Following a hearing in Colorado, he was ordered to pay $9,350, the amount of support arrearage accrued from June 19, 1964, to May 15, 1980, when the child became eighteen.

The mother contends that the district court erred in applying Oklahoma law to determine that the age of emancipation was 18 in this case, and that, therefore, the father’s duty to support his son ceased to exist on May 15, 1980. We agree.

Section 14-5-108, C.R.S.1973, provides that the duty of support under the Revised Uniform Act shall be that duty imposed under the laws of any state where the obligor was present for the period during which support is sought. Having resided in Colorado since 1977, the father is bound by Colorado law to provide support for his son until such time as the child becomes emancipated or attains 21 years of age. *Van Orman v. Van Orman,*30 Colo.App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971). The district court should have applied Colorado law to determine the father’s liability for child support after May 15, 1980.

The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

STERNBERG and TURSI, JJ., concur.
391 A.2d 682

#### Commonwealth v. Frederick, Appellant.

*600Submitted December 6, 1977.

John A. Goldstan, for appellant; Charles M. Guthrie, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Order affirmed.

WATKINS, former P. J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1147 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 224 ) IV-E-98 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:59 PM

Sheet 224 of 242P. 2 «*- «
<jC*° ST <>* O * <3

* W I \<m^1 g UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y \ -\M4r-• " WASHINGTON, D.C. 2046 0

^ PRO*- 0 MA R 2 9 1993

MEMORANDU

M OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N SUBJECT : Opportunit yFo r Genera l Motors , Chyrsle r and For d Moto r

Companie s Inpu t o n Onboar d Vapo r Recovery FROM : Dic k Wilson , Direct o

Offic e o f Mobil e S o TO : Publi c Docke t A-87-1 1 O n January22 , 199 3 th e U.S . Cour t o f Appeal s fo r th e D.C . Circui t issue d a n opinio n causing EPAt o reinstitut e it s rulemakin g fo r onboar d vapo r recoverystandards . I n response , EPAha s decide d t o prepar e a Federa l Registe r notic e reopenin g th e commen t perio d an d discussing th e ke yissue s and area s i n th e onboar d vapo r recoveryNPRMan d notic e o f Augus t 198 7 and Septembe r 1991 , respectively . O n Marc h10 , 199 3 I contacte d Do n Buis t o f For d Moto r Company . Th e purpos e o f m ycal l wa s t o offe r Ford , Genera l Moto r an d Chyrsle r a n opportunit yt o provid e EPAinpu t o n wha t issue s an d area s shoul d b e addresse d i n th e forthcoming notice . I state d tha t an

yinpu t shoul d b e i n writin g and tha t i n orde r fo r u s t o mov e expeditiousl yi n developing th e notic e i t mus t b e receive d no t late r tha n Marc h19 , 1993 .

Printed on Recycled

Paper
#### Freddie HARRIS v. STATE.

1 Div. 492.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

June 9, 1987.

Freddie Harris, pro se.

Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Beatrice E. Oliver, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PATTERSON, Judge.

Freddie Harris appeals the stimmary denial of his petition for writ of error coram nobis. The only allegation cognizable under the remedy is appellant’s allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel, based on the following ground: Counsel failed to “inform his client of the true working of the mandatory provisions of the habitual felony offender act and deliberately informed his client that if he refused to accept the plea agreement he would automatically be given the Habitual Felony Offender Act and a life-without parole sentence term.”

The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s petition without an evidentiary hearing because his allegation was insufficient. Appellant failed to satisfy the “prejudice” requirement of *Hill v. Lockhart,*474 U.S. 52, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985), for he did not allege in his petition that, had counsel been effective, he would have pleaded not guilty and insisted on going to trial.

Accordingly, this cause is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.
#### Charlie Jones, Plaintiff in Error, vs. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.

(Supreme Court of Florida,

April 18, 1905.)

Writ of Error to Circuit .Court, Columbia county ; Bascom H. Palmer, Judge.

No appearance for plaintiff in error.

Attorney-General for the State.

*409This action was brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. There was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant takes writ of error. Dismissed on motion of the Attorney-General.
EXHIBIT 10.124

                      ASSIGNMENT DATED DECEMBER 29, 1995 TO
              NUOASIS INTERNATIONAL, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION


                                   ASSIGNMENT



         KNOW ALL THESE MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

         THIS  ASSIGNMENT  AND  BILL OF SALE is  made  and  entered  into by and
between Nona Morelli's II Inc., a Colorado corporation ("Assignor"), and NuOasis
International Inc., a California corporation ("Assignee").

         WITNESSETH:  That for and in consideration of the issuance of shares of
Assignee's   $.01  par  value  common   stock,   and  other  good  and  valuable
consideration,  the  receipt of which is hereby  acknowledged,  Assignor  hereby
bargains, sells, grants and conveys unto Assignee all of its rights, duties, and
obligations  under the Asset  Purchase  Agreement  made by it with Silver  Faith
Development  Limited, a Hong Kong corporation,  ("Silver Faith") dated September
28, 1995 (the  "Agreement"),  concerning the purchase of certain real estate and
improvements  located in  Mainland  China,  commonly  known as the Peony  Garden
Project,  more fully  described in such  Agreement  which is attached  hereto as
Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.

         By its acceptance of this assignment,  Assignee assumes the performance
of all of Assignor's duties and obligations  under the Agreement,  and will hold
Assignor  harmless from any liability or loss resulting from the  performance or
non-performance of these duties and obligations.

         Assignor warrants that it has the power and authority,  and does hereby
sell and  transfer the  Agreement  to Assignee,  free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances.

         For the same  consideration,  Assignor  covenants  with  Assignee,  its
heirs, successors, and assigns that Assignor is the lawful owner of and has good
title to the  Agreement,  free and clear of all liens,  encumbrances  or adverse
claims;  that the Agreement is in full force and effect,  and that Assignor will
warrant and forever defend any claims of default, or breach by Silver Faith.

         IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  I have  caused  this  instrument  to be  executed
effective the 29th day of December, 1995.

                                   "Assignor"
                                   NONA MORELLI'S II INC.



                                   By:-----------------------------------------
                                      Name:
                                      Title:

                  


<PAGE>


                                   EXHIBIT "A"

                                     to the
                                   Assignment
                              dated December 29, 1995



                            ASSET PURCHASE AGREEMENT
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 184

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for a National Day of Reconciliation.
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 184

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That on a day of reconciliation selected joint3 ly by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and

4 the President pro tempore of the Senate, and with the
2

•HCON 184 EH

1 Chaplain of the House of Representatives and the Chap2 lain of the Senate in attendance—

3 (1) the two Houses of the Congress shall as4 semble in the Hall of the House of Representatives

5 at a time when the two Houses are not in session;

6 and

7 (2) during this assembly, the Members of the

8 two Houses may gather to humbly seek the blessings

9 of Providence for forgiveness, reconciliation, unity,

10 and charity for all people of the United States,

11 thereby assisting the Nation to realize its potential

12 as the champion of hope, the vindicator of the de13 fenseless, and the guardian of freedom.

Passed the House of Representatives October 23,

2001.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.2

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 for the period ended June 30, 2008 of the MacroShares $100 Oil Down Trust (the "Registrant"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), I, John A. Flanagan, principal financial officer of MACRO Securities Depositor, LLC, which acts as the depositor for the Registrant (the "Depositor"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.

The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.



Date: August 14, 2008

| |     |                                                                               
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ John A. Flanagan                                                          
| |     | John A. Flanagan
Chief Financial Officer of Depositor, on behalf of Registrant
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DATED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         1311003
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6343016
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1941000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               6802339
<PP&E>                                         9625911
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2363130
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                23855363
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         11290253  
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     440510
<COMMON>                                        131338
<OTHER-SE>                                  (17525211)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  23855363
<SALES>                                       25649417
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              25649417
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 45295360
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             8404418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (27780073)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (27780073)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (178006)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (27958079)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.14)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Patrick Bratton, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.
The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting.

Date: August 10, 2007



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Patrick Bratton    
|    |  | Patrick Bratton        
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer
Dismiss and Opinion Filed April 14, 2014 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-14-00313-CV
DR. JANINE CHARBONEAU, D.V.M., Appellant

V.

DONALD PAUL ZRINY, LOURDES HILL ZRIN Y, COLLIN COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES, DANNY DAVIS, MISTY BROWN, COLLIN COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, TERRY BOX, THE CITY OF LUCAS, CHRIS WARE, RUSSELL DRIVER, JAMES KIRK, NATHAN HOLDER, JIM KAYA, CHERYL REEVES, SC OTT GRAHAM, RON HOSS, SISTER HOSS, PAMELA PAXMAN, CRAIG PAXMAN, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY

SAINTS, AFFORDABLE DUMPSTER SERVICE, PATSY JEAN WYATT, DR. ERIN FOSTER SHULTS, D.V.M., MAZIE’S MI SSION, BRUCE FOSTER, DEB BLAKENEY, LISA BLOOMER, MARCUS BROUSSARD, TEXAS SPORTING BREED RESCUE, INC., SHEREE’S DOG RESCUE, LINDA VA N ASVELD, AND JOHN AND JA NE DOE 1-50, Appellees

On Appeal from the 417th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 417-04035-2013



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Moseley, Francis, and Lang Opinion by Justice Francis This is an appeal from the trial court’s interloc utory “order regarding serv ice on defendants.” By
order entered March 24, 2014, we questioned our jurisdic tion over this appeal and directed appellant to
file a letter brief addressing our concern. Appellant responded by m oving to dismiss the appeal. See T EX

.

R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).–2– We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See id.

140313F.P05 /Molly Francis/ MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

DR. JANINE CHARBONEAU, D.V.M., Appellant No. 05-14-00313-CV V.

DONALD PAUL ZRINY, LOURDES HILL ZRINY, COLLIN COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES, DANNY DAVIS, MISTY BROWN, COLLIN COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, TERRY BOX, THE CITY OF LUCAS, CHRIS WARE, RUSSELL DRIVER, JAMES KIRK, NATHAN HOLDER, JIM KAYA, CHERYL REEVES, SCOTT GRAHAM, RON HOSS, SISTER HOSS, PAMELA PAXMAN, CRAIG PAXMAN, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTERDAY SAINTS, AFFORDABLE DUMPSTER SERVICE, PASTY JEAN WYATT, DR. ERIN FOSTER SHULTS, D.V.M., MAZIE’S MISSION, BRUCE FOSTER, DEB BLAKENEY, LISA BLOOMER, MARCUS BROUSSARD, TEXAS SPORTING BREED RESCUE, INC., SHEREE’S DOG RESCUE, LINDA VAN ASVELD, AND JOHN AND JANE DOE 1-50, Appellees On Appeal from the 417th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 417-04035-2013. Opinion delivered by Justice Francis. Justices Moseley and Lang participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. We ORDER that appellees recover th eir costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant.–4– Judgment entered April 14, 2014

/Molly Francis/ MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE