alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 10.26**

 

PROMISSORY NOTE

 
| $339,000 |   |   | Worcester, Massachusetts  July 1, 2003 |
|----------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|

 

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGY,INC. a Delaware corporation (the “Maker”), promises to pay to the order ofPIERCE ATWOOD, a Maine general partnership (the “Holder”), the principal sum ofThree Hundred Thirty-Nine Thousand Dollars ($339,000), with interest at therate of ten percent (10%) per annum.  Paymentof this Note shall be made in lawful U.S. money in immediately available fundsto the Holder on the earlier of (1) the receipt by Maker of an infusion of$2,000,000 or more in cash in any form, including without limitation loans,equity investments in any form of capital stock or other security of the Maker,license fees, proceeds of sale of any assets, sponsored research payments orany other form of cash infusion, or (2) October 1, 2003.

 

The Maker may make prepayments of principaldue hereunder at any time and from time to time without payment of any penaltyor premium.  Any such prepayments shallbe applied, first, to any costs due hereunder to the Holder from theMaker, second, to accrued interest and third, to unpaidprincipal.

 

The Maker waives presentment, demand, noticeand protest and agrees to pay all costs of collection or attempted collection,including reasonable attorneys’ fees.

 

This Promissory Note shall be governed by andconstrued in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  If any provision of this Promissory Note is heldto be invalid or unenforceable, that provision shall be ineffective to theextent of such prohibition or shall be modified to conform with applicable law,without invalidating any other provisions of this Promissory Note.

 
| WITNESS:            | MAKER:                         |
|---------------------|--------------------------------|
|                |                           |
|                | ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGY, INC. |
|                |                           |
|                |                           |
| /s/ Gunnar Engstrom |                           | By: | /s/ Michael West |   |
|                | Its  President                 | 7-9-03 |
|                     |                                |  |  |  |  |

 

----
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Donald R. Kimble, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10 -Q of Huntington Preferred Capital,Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a -14and 15d -14) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; and  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, andreport financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   Date: August 12, 2005         /s/ Donald R. Kimble          Donald R. Kimble, President       (chief executive officer)
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 120 (Monday, September 10, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1460]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                TRIBUTE TO EDWARD AND DARLENE LUNDQUIST

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM LATHAM

                                of iowa

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 10, 2012

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Edward 
and Darlene Lundquist on the very special occasion of their 70th 
wedding anniversary. Their milestone took place Saturday, September 8, 
2012.
  Mr. and Mrs. Lundquist have been a happy couple since their days as 
high school sweethearts in Corning, Iowa. Never ones to waste time, 
Edward and Darlene eloped in neighboring Missouri on September 8, 1942 
and haven't looked back.
  Edward and Darlene have resided in Osceola, Iowa since 1959 when they 
purchased a lumberyard that is now in its third generation. In addition 
to building their successful business, Mr. and Mrs. Lundquist have also 
raised three children--Nancy, Jim and Alan--who have blessed them with 
eight grandchildren and 12 great-grandchildren, with another on the 
way. The Lundquists continue to be a visible and important part of 
their community, and it is an honor to represent them in the United 
States Congress.
  Edward and Darlene's lifelong commitment to each other and their 
family truly embodies Iowa's values. I salute this lovely couple on 
their 70th year of life together and I wish them many more. I know my 
colleagues in the United States House of Representatives will join me 
in congratulating them on this momentous occasion.

                          ____________________
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 February 2, 2016

a0125

Order 

Clerk

February 2, 2016

150397(86)

EBONY WHITE, Conservator for MA’KIERAN

MOSS, Minor,

Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,

v SC: 150397

COA: 304221

Wayne CC: 08-106604-NH

HUTZEL WOMEN’S HOSPITAL, a/k/a

HARPER-HUTZEL HOSPITAL,

Defendant-Appellant/

Cross-Appellee,

and

SUSAN BERMAN, M.D., NICOLE MAHONEY,

M.D. and SHUKRI ABDULLAH, M.D.,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September 

25, 2015 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5209]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                         WHY FOCUS ON RED TAPE?

  (Mr. HULTGREN asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute.)
  Mr. HULTGREN. Madam Speaker, on Monday I hosted a jobs fair in the 
western suburbs of Chicago with several of my colleagues. Over 1,500 
jobseekers showed up.
  I've visited with more than 100 northern Illinois business owners 
since I entered Congress. In each factory tour and office visit I ask: 
What would it take for you to create one more job, just to hire one 
more person? The answer is always the same: Cut red tape.
  The reality is 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs come from small 
businesses. Red tape throws an unfair burden on small businesses and 
paralyzes job creators. It has led to the least number of business 
start-ups in decades.
  There's a reason we focus so much on rolling back red tape here in 
the House. It's jobs.

                          ____________________
```
#### Application of Robert MACON, No. 60898 for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

No. A-12723.

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma.

Feb. 11, 1959.

Robert Macon, petitioner pro se.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent, H. C. McLeod, Warden, Oklahoma State Penitentiary, McAlester.

POWELL, Presiding Judge.

Robert Macon, petitioner, has applied to this court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking release from the Oklahoma State Penitentiary at McAlester, where he is serving *652a sentence by reason of a judgment entered in the district' court of Tulsa County on or about May 13, 1958, according to petitioner, finding defendant guilty of a charge of first degree manslaughter, and sentencing him in accordance with verdict of a jury to serve fifty years.

As grounds for release petitioner alleges, first, that he was convicted for an offense “for which there was no corpus delicti as charged in the information; and, second, “By the knowing and wilful and intentional use of perjured testimony which deprived petitioner of a fair and impartial trial.”

It should be kept in mind that “corpus delicti” does not mean body of the deceased, but rather the body, the substance, the essential elements of the crime. People v. Watters, 202 Cal. 154, 259 P. 442. As applied to any particular offense, the term means the actual commission by some one of the particular offense charged. Hilyard v. State, 90 Okl.Cr. 435, 214 P.2d 953, 28 A.L.R.2d 961.

The corpus delicti must be established as an independent fact beyond a reasonable doubt, but it is not necessary that it should be proven by direct and positive proof. It may be proven by circumstantial evidence, if from all of the circumstances the jury is satisfied of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Frye v. State, 25 Okl.Cr. 273, 219 P. 722, Crossett v. State, 96 Okl.Cr. 209, 252 P.2d 150; Hildebrandt v. State, 19 Okl.Cr. 30, 197 P. 852; Ramey v. State, 69 Okl.Cr. 257, 101 P.2d 856.

The petition does not state facts entitling petitioner to the writ, and this being so patent, we have not directed the warden to respond.

The question of proof of the corpus de1::cti and the question of perjury of any particular witness (and no witness was named in the petition whose testimony constituted the perjury alleged), would require a record of the testimony at trial. The time for appeal from the conviction has long since expired. Petitioner should have required his counsel to file a motion for new trial, and if the same was overruled, then an appeal could- have been perfected to this court.

As we said in In re Riddle, Okl.Cr., 292 P.2d 1043:

> “Writ of habeas corpus cannot be invoked for the purpose of reviewing acts of courts of record, when they act within their jurisdiction, nor can it be invoked for the purpose of correcting irregularities or errors, or as substitute for an appeal.”

Writ denied.

NIX and BRETT, JJ., concur.
# C_2020103EN.01002301.xml

| 30.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/23

---

Judgment of the General Court 12 February 2020 — Boshab v Council

(Case T-171/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Right to respect for private and family life - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality)

(2020/C 103/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Évariste Boshab (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Évariste Boshab to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Évariste Boshab to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.

---
# Buchanan - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission Executive Director Scotty Wampler Email &#115;&#x77;&#x61;m&#112;&#x6c;e&#114;&#x40;&#x63;p&#112;&#x64;c&#46;&#x6f;&#x72;gThe post Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
Exhibit 21

NB&T FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



|                                    |  |                       |  |                       |     |  
|----------------------------------- |  | --------------------- |  | --------------------- | --- | -
|NAME OF CORPORATION                 |  | STATE OFINCORPORATION |  | PERCENTAGEOFOWNERSHIP |    
|The National Bank and Trust Company |  | Ohio                  |  |                       | 100 | %
|NB&T Insurance Group, Inc.          |  | Ohio                  |  |                       | 100 | %
|NB&T Statutory Trust III            |  | Delaware              |  |                       | 100 | %



89
**Exhibit 31**

**SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Steve S. Sinohui, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company certify that:

        1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of SIN Holdings, Inc.;

        2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly 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 quarterly report;

      4.    I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:

           a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;

           b)  designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my 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 as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

           d)  disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over the financial report; and

      5.    I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the board of directors:

           a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting that 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.

/s/ Steve S. Sinohui
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 25, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20146

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

KENNETH STEELE,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:03-CR-339-ALL

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

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Counsel appointed to represent appellant Kenneth Steele has

requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Steele has not filed

a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s

brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from

further responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David J. KAY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 75-3844.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

June 23, 1976.

*1078Richard G. Sherman (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant.

John Vandevelde, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

OPINION

Before BARNES, HUFSTEDLER and CHOY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We do not think that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to permit Kay to withdraw his guilty plea. Kay did not attempt to withdraw his plea until after his codefendants had been sentenced. At that time he realized that adherence to his plea bargain would result in his imprisonment. Under these circumstances, his situation is akin to that of a defendant who seeks to withdraw his plea after sentencing. The district judge could reasonably have concluded that withdrawal of the plea would have permitted “appellant to use the guilty plea as a means of testing the weight of the potential sentence — a primary policy ground for denying plea changes.” *United States v. Simmons,*497 F.2d 177, 179 (5th Cir. 1974).

We find no merit to Kay’s contention that he was inadequately represented by his counsel.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

                            COLE NATIONAL GROUP, INC.

      KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned director and/or
officer of Cole National Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation, hereby constitutes
and appoints Jeffrey A. Cole, William P. Lahiff, Jr., and Joseph Gaglioti, and
each of them, as the true and lawful attorney or attorneys-in-fact, with full
power of substitution and revocation, for the undersigned and in the name, place
and stead of the undersigned, to sign on behalf of the undersigned an Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 29, 2000, pursuant to
Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and to sign any and all
amendments to such Annual Report, and to file the same, with all exhibits
thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, granting to said attorney or attorneys-in-fact, and each of
them, full power and authority to do so and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all
intents and purposes as the undersigned might or could do in person, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorney or attorneys-in-fact or any of
them or their substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue hereof.

      Executed as of the 23rd day of March, 2000.



/s/  Thomas T.S. Kaung                        /s/  Larry Pollock
----------------------------------            ----------------------------------
Thomas T.S. Kaung                             Larry Pollock
Executive Vice President                      President and Director
and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


/s/  Timothy F. Finley                        /s/  Charles A. Ratner
----------------------------------            ----------------------------------
Timothy F. Finley                             Charles A. Ratner
Director                                      Director


/s/  Irwin N. Gold                            /s/  Walter J. Salmon
----------------------------------            ----------------------------------
Irwin N. Gold                                 Walter J. Salmon
Director                                      Director


/s/  Peter V. Handal                          /s/  Jeffrey A. Cole
----------------------------------            ----------------------------------
Peter V. Handal                               Jeffrey A. Cole
Director                                      Chairman and Chief Executive
                                              Officer and Director
                                              (Principal Executive Officer)