alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23.1

                    CONSENT OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


TO: The Havana Group, Inc.

As independent certified public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of The Havana Group, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2001 of our report, which includes an explanatory paragraph
regarding the substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a
going concern, dated March 12, 2002 and contained in the Registration Statement
No. 333-98813 of The Havana Group, Inc. Form S-8 under the Securities Act of
1933 insofar as such report relates to the financial statements of The Havana
Group, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2001.

                           /s/ Russell Bedford Stefanou Mirchandani LLP
                           ----------------------------------------
                            Russell Bedford Stefanou Mirchandani LLP

New York, New York
May 19, 2003
<PAGE>   1


                             AMRESCO CAPITAL TRUST

                  EXHIBIT 21 - SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


          AMREIT I, Inc.  (a Delaware corporation)
          AMREIT II, Inc.  (a Nevada corporation)
          AMREIT CMBS I, Inc. (a Delaware corporation)
          ACT Holdings, Inc.  (a Georgia corporation)
          ACT Equities, Inc.  (a Georgia corporation)
          SC/ACT Investors, L.P.  (a Georgia limited partnership)
          SC/ACT Equities, LLC  (a Texas limited liability company)
          Arlington-Riverview Village, L.P.  (a Texas limited partnership)
exv10w2



 






Exhibit 10.2




[TJX Letterhead]




Ms. Carol Meyrowitz

The TJX Companies, Inc.

770 Cochituate Road

Framingham, MA 01701




     Re: Modification of Employment Agreement



Dear Ms. Meyrowitz:




     Reference is made to the Employment Agreement dated as of October 17, 2005 (the “Agreement”)
between you and The TJX Companies, Inc. (the “Company”). The Company proposes to amend Section 3(a)
of the Agreement (“Base Salary”) by adding at the end thereof the following text: “Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary in this Agreement, however, effective for periods commencing on or after
March 13, 2006 the preceding provisions of this Section 3(a) shall be applied by substituting
$990,000.00 for $1,100,000.00.”



     If you agree with the foregoing proposed amendment to the Agreement, please so indicate by
signing the enclosed copy of this letter and returning it to Mr. Paul Kangas, whereupon the
Agreement will be deemed amended, effective immediately, to incorporate the change set forth above,
and, except as to amended, the Agreement will continue in effect in accordance with its terms.
This letter agreement shall constitute an agreement under seal.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	THE TJX COMPANIES, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Paul Kangas
 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 



I agree to the amendment described above

to the Employment Agreement dated as of

October 17, 2005 between me and The TJX

Companies, Inc., effective as of the date

set forth below:




/s/ Carol Meyrowitz

Carol Meyrowitz




Date: March 7, 2006
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

WILLIE LEE HAVMMERI, §

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § Case No. 3:22-cv-00594-E-BT

§

METHODIST HEALTH SYSTEMS, §

Defendant. §

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff Willie Lee HavMmeri’s Request for Mediation 

and Settlement (ECF No. 18) and Defendant Methodist Health Systems’s (MHS)

Motion for More Definite Statement pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

12(e). (ECF No. 20). Neither party filed a response or objection. For the reasons 

outlined below, HavMmeri’s Request is DENIED and MHS’s Motion is GRANTED.

First, to the extent HavMmeri seeks an order requiring the parties to 

mediate their dispute or attend a settlement conference, his Request for Mediation 

and Settlement is premature. HavMmeri filed his Request before the United States 

Marshal effected service on MHS. See Return of Service (ECF No 19) (showing 

MHS served on June 24, 2022). MHS has not filed an answer to HavMmeri’s

complaint, and only recently filed its Rule 12 motion. The parties are still in the 

pleading stage of this lawsuit. The Court DENIES HavMmeri’s Request because

court-ordered mediation would be premature.

Second, the Court finds that HavMmeri has failed to plead sufficient facts, 

in the complaint, which would state a claim against MHS upon which relief can be 

Case 3:22-cv-00594-E-BT Document 23 Filed 10/07/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 65
2

granted. It is apparent that HavMmeri is capable of providing sufficient facts 

because his complaint states “See more pages,” although no additional pages are 

attached. Compl. (ECF No. 3). Also, HavMmeri’s Request for Mediation and 

Settlement appears to set forth additional details regarding the incident referenced 

in his complaint. But these allegations are not part of his complaint; and 

HavMmeri did not sign the Request. Therefore, MHS’s Motion for More Definite 

Statement is GRANTED.

The Court ORDERS HavMmeri to file a verified (or signed) amended 

complaint by October 31, 2022. The verified amended complaint must set forth

the specific claims HavMmeri asserts against MHS, the facts he relies upon to 

support these claims, and the specific federal statute or other law that provides the 

basis for the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. 

If HavMmeri fails to timely file a verified amended complaint, the Court will 

recommend that his claims against MHS be dismissed for want of prosecution. See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (providing for dismissal, with or without prejudice, for failure 

to prosecute and obey court orders).

SO ORDERED.

October 7, 2022

_______________________

REBECCA RUTHERFORD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-00594-E-BT Document 23 Filed 10/07/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 66
EXHIBIT 12.2

AEROSOL SERVICES COMPANY, INC.  FIXED CHARGE RATIO COMPUTATION  (GUARANTORS ONLY)

|                                                      |                              | Year Ended December 31,
|----------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------- | -----------------------
|
|
|Income (loss) before taxes                            |                              | $                      
|Fixed charges reflected in income (loss) before taxes |                              |                        
|                                                      | Interest expense             |                        
|                                                      | One third of rental expenses |                        
|                                                      |                              |                        
|Total fixed charges                                   |                              | $                      
|                                                      |                              |                        
|Income before taxes plus fixed charges above          |                              | $                      
|                                                      |                              |                        
|Fixed charge ratio                                    |                              |                        

---

QuickLinks
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Anthony Sfarra,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respectof the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the Wells Fargo CommercialMortgage Trust 2015-LC20 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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,all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to beprovided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included inthe Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Rialto CapitalAdvisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wilmington Trust, National Association, asTrustee, TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Trust Advisor, CoreLogicCommercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as Servicing Function Participant,National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant, Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Primary Servicer forthe 3 Columbus Circle Mortgage Loan, CWCapital Asset Management LLC, as SpecialServicer for the 3 Columbus Circle Mortgage Loan, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation, as Trustee for the 3 Columbus Circle Mortgage Loan, and PentalphaSurveillance LLC, as Operating Advisor for the 3 Columbus Circle Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated: March19, 2020

 

 

/s/ AnthonySfarra

 

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
#### McKEE v. STATE.

No. 25403.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 24, 1951.

Richard E. McDaniel, Joaquin, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

Paul McKee was convicted in the Justice Court of. Precinct No. 1, of Shelby County, for the offense of operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway at a rate of speed in excess of the legal speed limit, and -his punishment was assessed at a fine of $50.

■He appealed to the county court where the State’s motion to dismiss the appeal because of a defective appeal bond was granted.

Appellant filed a motion to re-instate the appeal and sought to amend the bond by filing a new bond, claiming his right to do so under the provisions of Art. 835, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.

In the instant proceeding, he attempts to appeal from the order of the county court refusing to permit the filing of an amended ■bond and to re-instate the appeal.

The relief to which appellant appears to be entitled is one appropriate to a mandamus proceeding in a proper court to require the county judge to permit the amendment of the bond.

This court’s jurisdiction in appeals in causes originating in the Justice Court is limited to convictions where the fine assessed in the county court exceeds $100. See Art. 53, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.

The power of this court and the judges thereof in mandamus proceedings is confined to the issuance of such writs where deemed necessary to enforce the jurisdic*885tion of this court. See Art. 53a, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.

We are without jurisdiction to enter any order herein other than to dismiss the appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court
COMPANY SANITIZED PUBLIC COPY OCTOBER 3 0, 2009



### 2010/15 PFOA STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM

October 30, 2009 DuPont Submission APPENDIX 1

– OECD SURVEY Claimed as Confidential Business Information
January 17, 2013 FRRCC Webinar

Attendance/Participant List

EPA HQ 

1.John Reeder, Deputy Chief of Staff

2.Cynthia Jones-Jackson, Act’g Director 

OFACMO

3.Mark Joyce, Associate Director for 

CMO/OFACMO

FRRCC Members (31)

Steve Balling

David Petty

Peggy Beltrone

Lori Berger

George Boggs

Richard Bonanno

Dan Botts

Charles (Chip) Bowling

Sen. Mike Brubaker

Robert Burns

Robert Carlson

Lawrence Clark

James Ford

Suzy Friedman

Omar Garza

Archie Hart

Patrick Johnson

Philip Korson

Paul Martin

Tom McDonald

Janis McFarland

Steve McNinch

FRRCC Members (cont)

Sec. Bill Northey

Jennie Popp

Anusuya Rangarajan

Robert Rynning

Larry Sanders

Cheryl Shippentower

Ann Sorensen

Don Teske

Dennis Treacy

EPA Regional Agricultural Advisors (19)

Andrea Szylvian/R1/USEPA/US

Robert Koethe/R1/USEPA/US

Kristina Heinemann/R2/USEPA/US

Kelly Shenk/CBP/USEPA/US

Duane Robertson/R4/USEPA/US

Thomas Davenport/R5/USEPA/US

Gerald Winn/R5/USEPA/US

Eugene Thilsted/R6/USEPA/US

Damon Frizzell/R7/USEPA/US

Rebecca Perrin/R8/USEPA/US

Kerry Drake/R9/USEPA/US

Don Hodge/R9/USEPA/US

Karma Anderson/R10/USEPA/US

James Werntz/R10/USEPA/US

Nicholas Peak/R10/USEPA/US

Robin Dunkins – EPA RTP
January 17, 2013 FRRCC Webinar

Attendance/Participant List

Presenters

Tom Christensen - Regional Conservationist

– Central Region

USDA Natural Resources Conservation 

Service,

Lynda Hall –Chief

Nonpoint Source Control Branch

EPA Office of Water

Otto Doering – Agricultural Economist, 

Purdue University

Public Participants

1. Brandon Harder – U.S. Senator Jerry 

Moran, Kansas

Agriculture and Energy Policy

2. Nephi Cole - Policy Office of 

Governor Matt Mead, Cheyenne WY

3. Phil Walsack - Missouri Public Utility 

Alliance (MPUA)

4. Jennifer Sackett Pohlenz – Clark 

Hill, PLC

5. Justin Bieri the Central Colorado 

Water Conservancy District

Other EPA 

Carol Galloway – EPA R7

Ginah Mortensen EPA R7

Jana Compton EPA-Cincinnati
#### SOUTH TEXAS LIFE INS. CO. v. DANHAUS et al.

No. 11264.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Galveston.

Oct. 16, 1941.

*407See, also, Tex.Civ.App., 146 S.W.2d 1098.

C. C. Jopling, of LaGrange, for appellant.

Richard Spinn and Odis Tomachefsky, both of Brenham, for appellees.

CODY, Justice.

This is a suit on a life insurance policy, which was issued by appellant on the life of Theresia Kellner, January 1, 1939, and was brought by Rosa Danhaus, the daughter of the insured, and the beneficiary under the policy, being joined in the suit by her husband. The application for the policy was signed by the beneficiary on December IS, 1938. The proof of death furnished on behalf of the beneficiary showed that the insured died on May 2, 1939, and that the principal cause of death was tuberculosis of the throat and larynx. The issue on the trial was whether the insured was in good health on January 1, 1939, the date of the policy, or was then suffering from tuberculosis. The case was tried by the court without a jury, and the court rendered judgment in favor of the beneficiary.

It is well settled that: “Where the insurer, in order to avoid the policy, contends that the insured failed to disclose certain facts, deemed material to the risk, the burden rests upon the insurer to allege and prove the facts sustaining this contention.” American Central Life Ins. Co. v. Alexander, Tex.ComApp., 56 S.W.2d 864, 866. The court made the finding in its judgment that the insured, Theresia Kellner, at the time of the making of *the*application and at the time of the delivery and execution of the policy, was in good health. There was, we believe, ample evidence to support the court’s determination of this issue in favor of appellees. It is true that the evidence to the effect that the insured was in good health was given by the beneficiary, and by a son of the insured; and the opinion introduced in evidence to the effect that the insured must have had tuberculosis on January 1, 1939, when the policy was delivered, was that of a doctor. There was also expert medical testimony, however, in answer to a hypothetical question from which the court could reasonably conclude that the insured never had tuberculosis at all. “It is the established law in this state that where a case has been tried without a jury and there was ample evidence in the record to support the findings of the trial court, such findings have the same force and effect as a verdict of the jury on the facts found, and a reviewing court must affirm the trial court’s judgment in the absence of other substantial error.” Carpenters and Joiners Union of America v. Ritter’s Cafe, Tex.Civ.App., 149 S.W.2d 694, *697.*

Reversible error not being here shown, the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.
#### In re Estate of Carland: Carland, Appellant, *v.*The Commerce Guardian Trust *&*Savings Bank et al., Appellees.

(No. 28293

Decided October 16, 1940.)

*Mr. Eugene Howard, Mr. Fred A. Smith*and *Messrs. Welles, Kelsey, Coburn Harrington,*for appellant.

*Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*attorney general, *Mr. Nicholas J. Walinsici*and *Mr. Nolan Boggs,*for appellees.

It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the *351reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Matthias, Hart and Turner, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, Kenneth D. Denman, certify that:1.  I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of iPass Inc.;2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)  Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andd)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5.   The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: March 15, 2006 / s / Kenneth D. Denman
Exhibit 31.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Jack E. Stover, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 of Interpace Diagnostics Group, Inc.;
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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





|Date: | June 14, 2016 | /s/ Jack E. Stover             
|----- | ------------- | -------------------------------
|      |               | Interim Chief Executive Officer
|      |               | (Principal Executive Officer)
IB 

Union Calendar No. 206 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3627 

[Report No. 113–286] 

To require the Attorney General to report on State law penalties for certain 

child abusers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 2, 2013 

Mr. PITTENGER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

DECEMBER 9, 2013 

Additional sponsors: Mr. HUDSON, Mr. MURPHY of Florida, and Mr. 

SWALWELL of California 

DECEMBER 9, 2013 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3627 RH

A BILL 

To require the Attorney General to report on State law 

penalties for certain child abusers, and for other purposes. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3627 RH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Kilah Davenport Child 

5 Protection Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ATTORNEY GENERAL REPORT. 

7 Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

8 of this Act, and again 3 years thereafter, the Attorney 

9 General shall publish and submit to the Committee on the 

10 Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Com11 mittee on the Judiciary of the United States Senate a re12 port on the penalties for violations of laws prohibiting 

13 child abuse in each of the 50 States, the District of Colum14 bia, and each territory of the United States, including 

15 whether the laws of that State, District, or territory pro16 vides for enhanced penalties when the victim has suffered 

17 serious bodily injury, or permanent or protracted loss or 

18 impairment of any mental or emotional function. 

19 SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF PREDICATE FOR INCREASED PEN20 ALTIES FOR CERTAIN DOMESTIC ASSAULTS. 

21 Section 117(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is 

22 amended by inserting ‘‘, or against a child of or in the 

23 care of the person committing the domestic assault’’ after 

24 ‘‘intimate partner’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 206 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3627 

[Report No. 113–286] 

A BILL 

To require the Attorney General to report on State 

other purposes. law penalties for certain child abusers, and for 

DECEMBER 9, 2013 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS