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

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 298

Expressing the sense of the Congress that State and local officials should

designate school nurses as ‘‘first responders’’ and remove any legal

or regulatory barriers that would impede school nurses from responding

to a biological or chemical attack.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 20, 2001

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

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that State and local

officials should designate school nurses as ‘‘first responders’’ and remove any legal or regulatory barriers that

would impede school nurses from responding to a biological or chemical attack.

Whereas there are more than 47,000 nurses in the Nation’s

elementary and secondary schools;

Whereas some children spend up to 10 hours in school each

day;

Whereas school children and teachers work in close proximity

to other people, quickening the spread of airborne diseases;
2

•HCON 298 IH

Whereas school nurses are the only professional health care

providers in many schools;

Whereas if a child becomes sick or arrives at school sick, a

school nurse is often the first medical professional to see,

diagnose, and treat the child;

Whereas in a biological or chemical attack on the United

States, school nurses would be among the first medical

professionals to respond, would put themselves at risk,

and would be responsible even for the children and teachers not subject to the attack; and

Whereas school children, including a large number of

mainstreamed children with disabilities, may be more vulnerable to biological or chemical attack, and therefore

show symptoms sooner than the general population: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

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

3 response to the terrorist attacks on the United States on

4 September 11, 2001, State and local officials should—

5 (1) designate school nurses as ‘‘first respond6 ers’’, conferring upon them all rights and respon7 sibilities such status implies in a particular State or

8 locality; and

9 (2) remove any legal or regulatory barriers that

10 would impede school nurses from doing everything

11 within medical guidelines for responding to a biologi12 cal or chemical attack.

Æ
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Robert D. Kelly, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Calpine GeneratingCompany, LLC and CalGen Finance Corp. (the “registrants”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrants as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantsand have:
 a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to each of theregistrants, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 16, 2004
     */s/ Robert D. Kelly*Robert D. Kelly*Executive Vice President andChief Financial OfficerCalpine Generating Company, LLC*
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Douglas MacLeod, certify that:

 

1.             Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this reporton Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2021-C (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.             Basedon my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Basedon my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the periodcovered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.             Iam responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted inpreparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the ExchangeAct periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.             Allof the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordancewith Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, exceptas otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in thisreport on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I havereasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A.

 

 

 

 

March 27, 2024
**Exhibit31.1**

BG FINANCIALGROUP, INC.

CERTIFICATION -PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, J. Robert Grubbs,certify that:

1.             I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q ofBG Financial Group, Inc.

2.             Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

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

a)             Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

b)            Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)             Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting;

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors:

a)             All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare 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 involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: November 14, 2006 | Signature: | /s/ J. Robert Grubbs                  |
|-------------------------|------------|---------------------------------------|
|                    |       | J. Robert Grubbs                      |
|                    |       | President and Chief 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 the Quarterly Report of Calpine Generating Company, LLC and CalGen Finance Corp. on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge, based upon a review of the Report:

 

(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 operation of the Company.

 

 

| */s/*  *Scott J. Davido*** |   | */s/*  *Charles B. Clark, Jr.* |
|--------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
| Scott J. Davido                      |   | Charles B. Clark, Jr.                    |
| *President and Corporate Secretary*  |   | *Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer*  |

 

 

Dated: January 31, 2007

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Calpine Generating Company, LLC and will be retained by Calpine Generating Company, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 21

- 2067

_____________________________
J ONATHAN H ARTLEY , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Marianne L. Aho , Judge

. September 2, 2021

P ER C URIAM

. The Court dismisses this appeal as untimely filed. If Appellant seeks belated appeal, he must file a proper petition pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c).

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 H. Kate Bedell of Bedell & Kuritz, Jacksonville
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
#### Carl LEON and Katherine C. Leon, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. Jessie DANSIE and Rodney Dansie, Defendants and Appellants.

No. 17402.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Dec. 31, 1981.

John P. Ashton, Salt Lake City, for Leon.

Thomas A. Duffin, Salt Lake City, for Dansie.

*731PER CURIAM:

The plaintiffs were awarded a quiet title judgment on a small tract of land in a hilly area at Herriman, Utah. Defendants appeal, urging title by boundary acquiescence, or by virtue of a profit a prendre.

The testimony of one of the defendants, among other evidence introduced, indicated that defendants did not use the disputed area continuously to establish a prescriptive right. Based upon such evidence, the trial court found that an interest by way of profit a prendre never was perfected.

The clear weight of the evidence also showed that although there was a fence in place far in excess of the prescriptive or adverse possession periods necessary to acquire enforceable new title, the almost complete concurrence of all the witnesses on both sides, was to the effect that the fence was used primarily to contain livestock from the field below. The record title clearly was shown to be in the plaintiffs at the outset and thereafter, which was confirmed many years later by an official survey.

The defendants have set forth in their brief, only isolated parts of testimony favoring their contentions, emphasizing existence of a fence for a long time. There was no showing of the important continuity of use factor, and no proof positive of any mutual acquiescence that the fence was or was intended to be a boundary. The trial court reasonably could have recognized and apparently did recognize such insufficiency in the evidence. The quality and quantum of evidence did not measure up to the standard that defendants claim *Fuoco v. Williams,*18 Utah 2d 282, 421 P.2d 944 (1966) enunciates.

With little or no contradiction but with considerable concurrence by the defendants themselves, a number of witnesses on both sides conceded that there had been no dispute as to record title at any time over the years. Practically everyone testified as to the purpose of the fence’s first and continuous existence — that of keeping livestock away from the fields below. Such purpose eliminates any question of boundary by acquiescence, since the primary purpose thereof is to lock title about which there may be some kind of disagreement into a fixed asset. It would appear that *Ringwood v. Bradford,*2 Utah 2d 119, 269 P.2d 1053 (1954) is dispositive here. That case rejected a claim of boundary by acquiescence.

The owners of the adjoining “Dansie property” sought out their neighbors, record owners of the “Leon property,” with an offer to purchase the subject property. This clearly constitutes a recognition, and far from an adverse gesture of the title as recorded, with no hint as to doubt about the true boundary.

This Court traditionally looks more favorably at evidence justifying affirmance of the decision. The undisputed evidence present in this case amply confirms the correctness of the trial court’s decision.

Affirmed, costs awarded to plaintiffs.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





CERTIFICATE
      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
      of True North Energy Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
      ended July 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
      the
      date hereof (the “Report”), I, Massimiliano Pozzoni, Principal Financial Officer
      of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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
                respect, the financial condition and result of operations of the
                Company.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




/s/
              Massimiliano PozzoniName:
              Massimiliano PozzoniTitle:
              Principal Financial Officer
              Date:
                September 13, 2007
41 

Order issued September , 2012 

In The 

Tourt of Apptats 

Iffift4 Elistrirt uf Jtxas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-00586-CR 

TIMOTHY MANIMOI, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

ORDER 

The Court REINSTATES this appeal. 

On August 3, 2012, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the reporter's 

record had not been filed. On August 20, 2012, we received an extension request from court reporter 

Sharon Hazlewood and on September 17, 2012, we received the reporter's record. Therefore, we 

VACATE the August 3, 2012 order requiring findings. 

We GRANT the August 20, 2012 extension request. The reporter's record is considered 

properly filed. 

Appellant's brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order. 

‘LDAVID L. BRIDGES 

JUSTICE
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 14241-000]

On February 24, 2012, the Commission issued Notice of Intent to File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD) and Commencement of Pre-Filing Process; Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Scoping; Request for Comments on the PAD and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study Requests. The notice established a due date of April 27, 2012, to file comments on the PAD and the scoping document, and to file study requests for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. The U.S. National Park Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requested an extension of time to May 31, 2012, to file comments and study requests given the complexity of the project and the large number of studies. They also note the need for additional time to review draft study plans prepared by the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) and to more collaboratively develop study plans with the AEA. On March 26, 2012, AEA filed a letter of support for the extension of time and a request to modify the due date for the initial and updated study report meetings to January 6, 2014 and January 5, 2015, respectively to avoid meetings between Christmas and New Years.

Due to the large size of this original project and the large number of studies proposed to address complex issues, the due date for all participants to file comments and study requests is extended until May 31, 2012, pursuant to section 5.29(f)(2) of the Commission's regulations. This extension will facilitate AEA's unique approach to collaboratively develop study plans and will not delay processing of the license application. AEA's request to modify the due date for the initial and updated study reports is also granted. A revised schedule for this project will be published in Scoping Document 2, which will be issued by July 16, 2012.

      ( print page 21555)    
Dated: April 2, 2012.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-8523 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 13, 2016

NO. 03-14-00406-CV

Gary Phillips, Appellant

v.

Boo 2 You, LLC; George Steven Smith; and Linda K. Smith, Appellees

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BOURLAND, AND SHANNON*

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE SHANNON

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on May 29, 2014. Having reviewed the 

record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial 

court’s order. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s order. The appellant shall pay all 

costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.

* Before Bob E. Shannon, Chief Justice (retired), Third Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment. 

See Tex. Gov’t Code § 74.003(b).