alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 24.4

POWER OF ATTORNEY

WHEREAS, AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING COMPANY, an Illinois corporation (herein
referred to as the Company), is required to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, under the provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008; and

WHEREAS, each of the below undersigned is a director of the Company.

NOW, THEREFORE, each of the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Charles D. Naslund and/or Warner L. Baxter and/or Steven R. Sullivan and/or
Martin J. Lyons and/or Jerre E. Birdsong the true and lawful attorneys-in-fact of the undersigned, for and in the name, place and stead of the undersigned, to affix the name of the undersigned to said Form 10-K and any amendments thereto, and, for
the performance of the same acts, each with power to appoint in their place and stead and as their substitute, one or more attorneys-in-fact for the undersigned, with full power of revocation; hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
attorneys-in-fact may do by virtue hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their hands this 13th day of February
2009:



|                             |  |  |  |                        |  | 
|---------------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------- |  | 
|                             |  |  |  |                        |  | 
|                             |  |  | 
|Daniel F. Cole, Director     |  |  |  | /s/ Daniel F. Cole     |  | 
|                             |  |  | 
|Steven R. Sullivan, Director |  |  |  | /s/ Steven R. Sullivan |  | 
|                             |  |  |  |                        |  | 





|                  |  |   |  |     |  | 
|----------------- |  | - |  | --- |  | 
|STATE OF MISSOURI |  | ) |  |     |  | 
|                  |  | ) |  | SS. |  | 
|CITY OF ST. LOUIS |  | ) |  |     |  | 

On this 13th day of February, 2009, before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for said
State, personally appeared the above-named directors of Ameren Energy Generating Company, known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing power of attorney and acknowledged to me that they executed the same as their free
act and deed for the purposes therein stated.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal.



/s/ Carolyn J. ShannonCAROLYN J. SHANNON Notary Public  Notary Seal STATE OF MISSOURI  ST. LOUIS COUNTY Commission #08383284 My Commission Expires
03/02/2012
#### Robert Webb, Plaintiff, *v.*Frederick W. I. Lundy, Doing Business as F. W. I. L. Lundy Bros., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

May 7, 1959.

*Jacob N. Kliegman*for defendant.

*Isidore M. Towbis*for plaintiff.

Samuel M. Gold, J.

Defendant moves for dismissal of the complaint for legal insufficiency. Plaintiff seeks the recovery *432of the full minimum wages earned during his- employment with the defendant pursuant to the requirements of the retail (restaurant) wage order of the Industrial Commissioner of the State of New York promulgated pursuant to article 19 of the Labor Law of the State of New York governing wages payable to persons in restaurants. During such employment the plaintiff received no wages, apparently relying on tips.

Section 663-a of the Labor Law provides as follows: “To effectuate the aim of this article and to protect the minimum wage standards and rates provided for women and minors, no male twenty-one years of age or over shall be employed in an occupation at less than the minimum standards or rates of wages fixed for women and minors in such occupation under a minimum wage order.”

Defendant urges that the complaint fails to allege that plaintiff was performing work available to Avomen, the existence of the relationship of master and servant, or that the defendant is engaged in an industry which is subject to the provisions of the minimum wage law.

It is a reasonable inference from the reference in the complaint to the retail (restaurant) wage order that the defendant is engaged in an industry subject to that law. It is also repeatedly alleged in the complaint that the plaintiff was employed by the defendant as his employer as an attendant in the men’s washroom. It is unnecessary to allege whether the plaintiff is a minor or a person over 21 years of age, for whether the plaintiff is a woman, a minor, or male over 21 years of age, the employer and the restaurant industry is required to pay not less than the minimum rates provided in the order of the Industrial Commissioner. Apart from the fact that it would appear that employment of the character here involved is available to minors, it is not a matter for material allegation in the complaint but rather of defense.

The motion is denied.
# C_2016202EN.01004401.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/44

---

Article 52

1.   The Treaties shall apply to the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, Ireland, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Republic of Croatia, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

2.   The territorial scope of the Treaties is specified in Article 355 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 266 

Expressing support for the Nation’s law enforcement officers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 15, 2015 

Mr. REICHERT submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the Nation’s law enforcement officers. 

Whereas law enforcement officers, including police officers, 

corrections officers, customs officers, State troopers, special agents, criminal investigators, tribal officers, military 

police officers, immigration officers, court bailiffs, probation officers, arson investigators, auxiliary officers, sheriffs, marshals, and deputies make substantial contributions to the Nation and the communities in which they 

serve; 

Whereas law enforcement officers are recognized for their 

public service to all, knowing they may face extremely 

dangerous situations while carrying out their duties; 

Whereas law enforcement officers are recognized for the difficult careers they have chosen; 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 266 IH 

Whereas the safety and well-being of all Americans depend 

upon the law enforcement officers who protect and serve 

their communities in a professional manner: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) celebrates the dedication and contributions 

3 that law enforcement officers, including police offi4 cers, corrections officers, customs officers, State 

5 troopers, special agents, criminal investigators, tribal 

6 officers, military police officers, immigration officers, 

7 court bailiffs, probation officers, arson investigators, 

8 auxiliary officers, sheriffs, marshals, and deputies 

9 make every day across the Nation; and 

10 (2) encourages support for law enforcement of11 ficers nationwide and calls upon the people of the 

12 United States to express their support for law en13 forcement with appropriate ceremonies, programs, 

14 and activities. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
18953

#### Calleja v. United Airlines, Inc.

Affirmed
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
  RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
    CERTIFICATION
    OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF AMEREN CORPORATION
    (required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
    Form 10-K
      Rules 13a-15(e) 15d-15(e)) Rules 13a-15(f) 15d-15(f))
  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)
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or
    caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
    designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
    regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
    preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
    accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; c)
    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 d)
    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    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: March 1,
    2007
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 338 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 338

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         June 25, 2015.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take 
from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1295) to extend the African Growth and 
Opportunity Act, the Generalized System of Preferences, the preferential duty 
treatment program for Haiti, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment 
to the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the 
House, without intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair 
of the Committee on Ways and Means or his designee that the House concur in the 
Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment. The Senate 
amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall be 
debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means. The previous question shall 
be considered as ordered on the motion to adoption without intervening motion.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7846

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

PAUL OSARIASE MONDAY OMOREGBEE, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, 

District Judge. (5:99-cr-00055-BO-1; 5:06-cv-00509-BO) 

Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: December 2, 2008 

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Paul Osariase Monday Omoregbee, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. 

Matheny, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Paul Osariase Monday Omoregbee seeks to appeal the 

district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will 

not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have 

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Omoregbee 

has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also 

deny Omoregbee’s motions for appointment of counsel. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             601                  56,359
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,319,053               2,689,893
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,240,876               1,204,321
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,996,338               4,315,642
<PP&E>                                       8,333,165               8,318,264
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,428,570               1,231,776
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,337,398              20,908,198
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       23,349,959              22,839,582
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                       117,018                 117,018
<OTHER-SE>                                 (11,733,721)             (7,449,455)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,337,398              20,908,198
<SALES>                                      5,179,117               5,714,703
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,179,117               5,714,703
<CGS>                                        3,460,355               4,767,167
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,348,317               7,252,824
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,620                   3,785
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             2,125,443                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             704,539               1,533,469
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (3,005,802)             (3,075,375)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (3,005,802)             (3,075,375)
<DISCONTINUED>                              (1,349,741)               (528,327)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,355,542)             (3,603,702)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.29)                   (.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.38)                   (.49)
        

</TABLE>
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
Yorktown, 1781
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Allyn Cox

EverGreene Painting Studios

Materials
    Oil on Canvas

Year
    1994

Location
      
U.S. Capitol Building
          Cox Corridors

At the end of the Revolutionary War, the British are shown laying down their arms against a symbolic sunset.About the Cox Corridors MuralsThe first floor of the U.S. Capitol's House wing is elaborately decorated with wall and ceiling murals by artist Allyn Cox. The western north-south corridor, called the Westward Expansion corridor, includes maps and scenes showing the growth of the United States from early exploration through the acquisition of Alaska and Hawaii. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
April 14,2015

No. 04-14-00897-CV

IN THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM THOMAS BOOTH

From the Probate Court No 2, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-PC-2786

Honorable Tom Rickhoff, Judge Presiding

ORDER OF REFERRAL

The Court, after extending the deadline to choose mediator from April 3, 2015, to April 10,

2015, and after reviewing the responses of the parties, has determined that the dispute pending in this

Court is appropriate for referral to an Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure. Tex. Civ. Prac.

Rem. Code Ann. 154.021 (a) (Vernon 2005). It is therefore, ORDERED that this cause be referred to

Mediated Settlement Conference which will be conducted by Joseph Casseb, an impartial person, as

Mediator. See id. §154.051.052.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that all appellate deadlines are hereby suspended until May 28,

2015.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that mediation shall commence at such place as the Mediator may

designate and proceed in accordance with the schedule set by the Mediator until completed, but in any

event the mediation shall be completed no later than forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order. The

Mediator shall file with the Clerk of Court within three (3) days of the completion of the mediation

written report concerning the disposition of this appeal.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Mediator shall be compensated and that parties in this cause

shall be equally responsible for its share of this obligation. Mediation fees shall ultimately be taxed as

court costs. See id. 154.054.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that all parties to this cause are directed to attend the Mediated

Settlement Conference with their counsel of record. The corporate party representative in attendance and

the individual party representatives shall have full authority to settle up to and including the judgment

amount. To facilitate this procedure the Mediator shall encourage and assist, but will not compel or

coerce the parties in reaching settlement of the dispute. Unless the parties otherwise agree, all matters,

including the conduct and demeanor of the parties and their counsel during mediation, shall remain

confidential and shall never be disclosed to anyone, including this Court. See id. 154.053.
Provided the parties are able to settle all matters related to this appeal, the parties are directed to

file joint motion requesting an appropriate disposition of this appeal within thirty (30) days of the date

of mediation.

It is so ORDERED on April 14, 2015.

Marialyn-Barnarcf./Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF. have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 14lh day of April. 2015.

.jy rfl/E. iffib. Clerk'
21096

#### State v. Cho

Affirmed
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply577Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  MICHAEL LILLY ... (not verified)PermalinkNovember 4, 2017 - 1:05pmYOU all have the very best job in all of USA!  Thank you for sharing.
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
#### Dominick J. FAOUR et al., Appellants, v. BANKMER REAL ESTATE CORPORATION, Appellee.

No. 172.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Nov. 27, 1939.

John F. McD. Heffernan, of New York City, for appellants.

David Haar, of New York City (Robert H. Epstein, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before L. HAND, CLARK, and PATTERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed.