alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### FOISTER et al. v. SMITH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 19, 1954.

Rehearing Denied May 28, 1954.

Floyd Taylor, Pineville, for appellants.

W. R. Knuckles, W. J. Stone, Pineville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is a motion for an appeal under KRS 21.080 from a judgment of the Bell Circuit Court awarding appellee the surplus of $551.44 after the satisfaction by foreclosure proceedings of a mortgage lien against her home she and her deceased husband jointly owned.

Appellants contend that appellee paid no part of the purchase price of this house and lot which had been conveyed to her and her husband jointly, therefore ap-pellee did not take any interest in the property. We find no merit in this contention. The record is silent as to whether appellee paid any part of the purchase price and the rule is that where a conveyance of real estate is made to two persons jointly, the presumption arises, in the absence of proof to the contrary, that each grantee paid his proportion of the purchase money. 26 C.J.S., Deeds, § 182, page 590. See Fairchild v. Fairchild, 237 Ky. 700, 36 S.W.2d 337, and Combs v. Slone, 306 Ky. 419, 208 S.W.2d 304, where we held that when a deed is made jointly to a man and his wife, each takes an undivided one-half interest in the property.

It is next insisted by appellants that appellee by joining her husband in the mortgage waived generally her right of *742homestead in the property. With this we cannot agree. Sudie, by joining her husband in the mortgage, only waived her right of homestead to the mortgagee and to none other. Lyon v. Lemaster, 270 Ky. 122, 109 S.W.2d 39.

The motion for an appeal is overruled and the judgment is affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Dwight B. Grizzell, certify that: 

 

1. I havereviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Mountain National Bancshares, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report; 

 

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

 

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

 

a) Designated 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, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b) [Omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986] 

 

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness 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 mostrecent 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(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation 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 functions): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: March 31, 2005 

 

/s/ Dwight B. Grizzell
Dwight B. GrizzellPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32



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 Elizabeth Arden, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. Scott Beattie, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Stephen J. Smith, Executive Vice President and Chief 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 to the best of our knowledge:



(i)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(ii)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|Date:  November 7, 2006 |  | /s/ E. Scott Beattie                                
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |                                                     
|                        |  | E. Scott Beattie                                    
|                        |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer     
|                        |  |                                                     
|Date:  November 7, 2006 |  | /s/ Stephen J. Smith                                
|                        |  |                                                     
|                        |  | Stephen J. Smith                                    
|                        |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                        |  |                                                     





This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act").  Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1

      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 Annual Report of Randgold Resources Limited (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, D. Mark
Bristow, Chief Executive 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, to my knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.

     /s/ D. Mark Bristow
     ---------------------------
     D. Mark Bristow
     Chief Executive Officer
     June 25, 2007
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26017]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


RTCA Special Committee 159; Minimum Operational Performance 
Standards for Airborne Navigation Equipment Using Global Positioning 
System (GPS)

    Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(P.L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a 
Special Committee 159 meeting to be held October 24-27, 2000, starting 
at 9 a.m. each day. The meeting will be held at RTCA, 1140 Connecticut 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20036.
    The agenda will include:

Specific Working Group Sessions

October 24

Working Group (WG-1), Third Civil Frequency and WG-2C, GPS/Inertial.

October 25

9:00-12:00
    WG-4, Precision Landing Guidance (GPS/LAAS) and WG-6, GPS/
Interference;
1:30-4:30
    WG-2, GPS/WAAS
    SC-159 AD Hoc, Recommendation and WG5, Surface Surveillance

October 26

WG-2, GPS/WAAS
WG-4, Precision Landing Guidance (GPS/LAAS) and WG-6, GPS/Interference

October 27: Plenary Session

(1) Introductory Remarks;
(2) Approve Summary of Previous Meeting;
(3) Review Working Group (WG) Progress and Identify Issues for 
Resolution:
    (a) GPS/3rd Civil Frequency (WG-1);
    (b) GPS/WAAS (WG-2);
    (c) GPS/GLONASS (WG-2A);
    (d) GPS/Inertial (WG-2C);
    (e) GPS/Precision Landing Guidance (WG-4);
    (f) GPS/Airport Surface Surveillance (WG-5);
    (g) GPS Interference (WG-6);
    (h) SC-159 Ad Hoc;
(4) Review of EUROCAE Activities;
(5) Review/Approve Final Draft, SC-159, Response to the Johns Hopkins 
University Applied Physics Laboratory Recommendation Regarding Receiver 
Autonomous Integrity Monitoring;
(6) Assignment/Review of Future Work;
(7) Other Business;
(8) Date and Location of Next Meeting;
(9) Closing.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the RTCA Secretariat, 
at (202) 833-9339 (phone), (202) 833-9434 (fax). Members of the public 
may present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 2, 2000.
Janice L. Peters,
Designated Official.
[FR Doc. 00-26017 Filed 10-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### SCOTT v. STATE.

No. 25966.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 22, 1952.

Motion to Reinstate Appeal Denied Dec. 10, 1952.

H. S. Beard, Waco, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

This is a conviction for keeping a bawdy house; the punishment, a fine of $200 and 20 days in jail.

The record contains no notice of appeal. The state moves to dismiss the appeal because of such fact.

In reply, appellant insists that the record affirmatively reflects that his motion for new trial has not been passed upon but is pending, undisposed of, in the trial court. He urges, therefore, that there is no final judgment against him from which he can give notice of appeal. He would have us so hold.

*276This contention is based upon the provisions of art. 755, C.C.P., as amended by Chap. 464, Acts of the Regular Session of the 52nd Legislature, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P. art. 755, whereby authority is given for the filing or determination of a motion for new trial after adjournment of the term at which the case was tried, whether in vacation or at a new term of court. It is argued that such statute repeals the presumption that the adjournment of court without passing upon a motion for new trial constituted an automatic overruling of the motion, as was the rule prior to the amendment of art. 755, C.C.P., above mentioned. Williams v. State, 99 Tex.Cr.R. 356, 269 S.W. 434.

The appellate jurisdiction of this court is invoked by a notice of appeal given in open court and entered of record. No such notice of appeal appears in this record. Obviously, therefore, the appellate jurisdiction of this court has not attached, and we are. without authority, in this proceeding, to determine the question sought to be presented by appellant.

The state’s motion to dismiss the appeal is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

MORRISON, Judge.

At a previous day of this term, we dismissed the appeal herein, because no notice of appeal appeared in the record.

Appellant has attempted to cure 'this defect by furnishing this Court with a nunc pro- tunc order of the trial court. An examination of such order reveals that it was an effort on the part of the trial court to perfect appellant’s appeal, not on the case on its merits, but an appeal from his order of June 17, 1952, denying the prayer, that he enter a nunc pro tunc order. This was an interlocutory order and not appealable to this Court. 4 Tex. Juris.,- Sec. 18, p. 33.

The motion to reinstate the appeal is denied.
CERTIFICATION OF 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 The Stephan Co. (the "Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Frank F. Ferola, Chief Executive 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, to my knowledge:

(1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



/s/ Frank F. Ferola
__________________________________
Frank F. Ferola
Chief Executive Officer
July 25, 2005



This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5721 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5721

     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain electric cooktops.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2012

  Mr. Cohen introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain electric cooktops.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CERTAIN ELECTRIC COOKTOPS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00         Electric cooktops  Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          each measuring                                                    12/31/2015
                          approximately 66
                          cm or more but
                          not over 91.44 cm
                          in width,
                          weighing
                          approximately
                          10.3 kg or more
                          but not more than
                          20.9 kg, having
                          either a coil
                          electric cooking
                          element or smooth
                          cooking surface
                          with incorporated
                          element with
                          either 4 or 5
                          burners (provided
                          for in subheading
                          8516.60.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### BILLINGSLEA v. STATE.

No. 26970.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 28, 1954.

On Rehearing June 9, 1954.

M. D. Emerson, Paris, for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is the possession of whiskey for the purpose of sale in a dry area, with a prior conviction alleged to enhance the punishment; the punishment, a fine of $2,000.

No statement of facts accompanies the record.

Complaint is made for the first time in this Court that the information is not based on a valid complaint because the complaint itself is fatally defective and void. The complaint purports .to be the affidavit of E. Dean Fuller; it is signed “E. Dean Fuller”; but when the officer came to affix his jurat he did so as follows:

> “Sworn to and subscribed before me by Dan A. Bills this the 29 day of August, A.D. 1953.

> (C. V. Flanary, Jr.), Assistant County Attorney, Lamar County, Texas.”

*669The information is regular and states that it is based upon the affidavit of E. Dean Fuller.

This is a matter of form and not of substance and could have been amended had it been called to the trial court’s attention in time. Hampton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 248 S.W.2d 488, and Chapman v. State, 135 Tex.Cr.R. 298, 119 S.W.2d 1047.

In order to properly present this question for review, appellant must show that he proceeded in accordance with the controlling statutes in the court below. Howard v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 247 S.W.2d 112.

> Article 505, C.C.P., provides, in part:

> “On the part of the defendant, the following are the only pleadings: * * *

> “3. An exception to the indictment or information for some matter of form or substance.”

> Article 513, C.C.P., provides:

> “All motions to set aside an indictment or information and all special pleas and exceptions shall be in writing.”

We find no written motion to quash the information in the record.

> Article 523, C.C.P., provides:

> “The court, at its discretion, may hear and determine such motions and exceptions at any time before a trial has been entered upon, but not afterward.”

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

On Motion For Rehearing

Appellant calls our attention on rehearing to the fact that the information was filed on August 28, 1953, while the supporting complaint was not sworn to until the following day.

It follows that the complaint was not in existence when the information was presented on August 28, 1953.

Recently, in Baker v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 265 S.W.2d 600, we reversed a cause from the same county for the same defect.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is granted, the judgment of affirmance is set aside, and the judgment is now reversed and the cause remanded.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



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 The Stephan Co. (the
"Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank F. Ferola, Chief Executive
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, to my knowledge:

(1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and

(2)    The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Frank F. Ferola
__________________________________
Frank F. Ferola
Chief Executive Officer
May 21, 2007
Exhibit  32





Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a)

and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)





Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (subsections (a)

and (b) of Section 1350,  Chapter 63 of Title 18,  United States Code), each

of the undersigned officers of The  L.S. Starrett Company,  a Massachusetts

corporation  (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's

knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 24, 2005 (the

"Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section

13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information

contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the

financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  January 31, 2006                     /s/ Douglas A. Starrett

Douglas A. Starrett

Chief Executive Officer





Date:  November 2, 2005                     /s/ Randall J. Hylek

Randall J. Hylek

Chief Financial Officer





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section

906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section

1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United  States Code) and is not being filed as

part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been

provided to The L.S. Starrett Company and will be retained by The L.S.

Starrett Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or

its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1



BOSTON LIFE SCIENCES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES



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 Boston Life Sciences, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Peter G. Savas, Chairman and Chief Executive 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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





/s/ PETER G. SAVASPeter G. SavasChairman and Chief Executive Officer




Date: November 15, 2004