alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF INCOME, STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS, BALANCE SHEET, AND STATEMENT OF
COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000201533
<NAME> CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                        4,004
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        645
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             699
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         1,822
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,170
<COMMON>                                           841
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                          645
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                485
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   1,971
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              395
<PREFERRED>                                         44
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                               805
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 214
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                        1,201
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                       55
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                         85
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                    35
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                   2,365
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                    7,170
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        3,874
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               172
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       3,199
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       3,371
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            503
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                  18
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     521
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           181
<NET-INCOME>                                       340
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         27
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      313
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                           262
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                           62
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             781
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                       OF
                           FIRSTCITY LIQUIDATING TRUST


In connection with the Quarterly Report of FirstCity Liquidating Trust (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert W. Brown, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as
of the date hereof, solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

To the best of 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.


Date: November 10, 2003                             /s/ Robert W. Brown
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                    Robert W. Brown
                                                    Principal Executive Officer



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.
#### J. C. STRIBLING et al., Appellants, v. Mrs. L. F. STRIBLING, Appellee.

No. 8092.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Austin.

June 19, 1935.

W. H. Nunn, of Georgetown, C. C. Ashley, of Llano, and James Cornell and D. B. Hardeman, both of- San Angelo, for appellants.

V. B. Goar and N. T. Stubbs, both of Johnson' City, for appellee.

BAUGH, Justice.

Appeal is from an order of the district court of Llano county appointing a receiver of the properties involved in cause No. 8130, on the docket of this court, 85 S.W.(2d) 315, this day decided.

Application by Mrs. L. F. Stribling for appointment of the receiver was first filed in the district court of Blanco county, after judgment had been rendered in her favor in, cause No. 8130. By agreement of the parties it was transferred to the district court of Llano county. The grounds relied upon by appellants herein in resisting the appointment of such receiver are substantially the same as those urged on appeal for reversal of the trial court’s judgment in the main case tried in Blanco county. These grounds were not *323sustained, and .the judgment in the main case was this day affirmed in cause No. 8130, to which we refer. It follows, therefore, that the judgment of the trial court appointing the receiver should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>   1


                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

        KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned Officers and/or
Directors of PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY (the "Company"), a Delaware
corporation, do hereby constitute and appoint PAUL F. FERGUSON, JR., CARL B.
KING and ROBERT W. REED, and each of them, their true and lawful attorney and
agent to do any and all acts and things, and execute any and all instruments
which, with the advice of Counsel, said attorney and agent may deem necessary
or advisable to enable the Company to comply with the Securities Act of 1934,
as amended, and any rules, regulations and requirements of the Securities and
Exchange Commission, in connection with the filing under said Act of the Form
10-K Annual Report with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including
specifically, but without limitation thereof, to sign their names as Officers
and/or Directors of the Company to the Form 10-K Report, and to any instrument
or document filed as a part of, or in connection with, said Form 10-K Report or
Amendment thereto; and the undersigned do hereby ratify and confirm all that
said attorney and agent shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have subscribed these presents this 
28th day of March, 1996


/s/  DENNIS HENDRIX                        /s/  GEORGE L. MAZANEC
-------------------------------------      -------------------------------------
Dennis Hendrix                             George L. Mazanec


/s/  STEVEN M. ROVERUD                     /s/  PAUL M. ANDERSON
-------------------------------------      -------------------------------------
Steven M. Roverud                          Paul M. Anderson


/s/  PAUL F. FERGUSON, JR.                 /s/  SANDRA P. MEYER
-------------------------------------      -------------------------------------
Paul F. Ferguson, Jr.                      Sandra P. Meyer
Senior Vice President and                  Vice President
  Chief Financial Officer                  (Principal Accounting Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 73077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20339]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 9:00 a.m. EDT, Friday, September 13, 2024.

PLACE: Virtual meeting.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Enforcement matters. In the event that the 
time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the 
change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will 
be posted on the Commission's website at https://www.cftc.gov/.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-
5964.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: September 4, 2024.
Christopher Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024-20339 Filed 9-4-24; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements filed as part of the annual report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such report
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                              1,752
<SECURITIES>                            0         
<RECEIVABLES>                      29,318  
<ALLOWANCES>                        1,302
<INVENTORY>                        28,763
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   67,921
<PP&E>                             15,084
<DEPRECIATION>                      7,213
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    186,211
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              29,958
<BONDS>                           126,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                               93
<OTHER-SE>                         25,358
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      186,211
<SALES>                           136,283
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  186,600
<CGS>                              79,611
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     113,541
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      929
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 14,656
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    (7,139)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (7,139)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                       (7,139)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (0.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (0.78) 
        


</TABLE>
|                                           |
|-------------------------------------------|
|                                           |  |
| Name of Subsidiary                        | Jurisdiction of Organization |
|                                      |   |
| U.S. Subsidiaries:                        |   |
| ACCO Brands International, Inc.           | Delaware |
| ACCO Brands USA LLC                       | Delaware |
| ACCO Europe Finance Holdings, LLC         | Delaware |
| ACCO Europe International Holdings, LLC   | Delaware |
| ACCO International Holdings, Inc.         | Delaware |
| General Binding LLC                       | Delaware |
| GBC International, Inc.                   | Nevada |
|                                      |   |
| International Subsidiaries:               |   |
| ACCO Australia Pty. Limited               | Australia |
| ACCO Brands Australia Holding Pty. Ltd.   | Australia |
| ACCO Brands Australia Pty. Ltd.           | Australia |
| Tilibra Produtos de Papelaria Ltda.       | Brazil |
| ACCO Brands C&OP Inc.                 | Canada |
| ACCO Brands Canada Inc.                   | Canada |
| ACCO Brands Canada LP                     | Canada |
| ACCO Brands CDA Ltd.                      | Canada |
| ACCO Brands Europe Holding LP             | England |
| ACCO Brands Europe Ltd.                   | England |
| ACCO Europe Finance LP                    | England |
| ACCO Europe Ltd.                          | England |
| ACCO-Rexel Group Services Limited         | England |
| ACCO UK Limited                           | England |
| ACCO Deutschland Beteiligungsgesellschaft | Germany |
| ACCO-Rexel Limited                        | Ireland |
| ACCO Brands Italia S.r.L.                 | Italy |
| ACCO Brands Japan KK                      | Japan |
| ACCO Mexicana S.A. de C.V.                | Mexico |
| ACCO Brands Benelux BV                    | Netherlands |
| ACCO Nederland Holding BV                 | Netherlands |
| GBC Europe AB                             | Sweden |
Exhibit
10.4


 


SECOND AMENDMENT

TO

EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Second Amendment (this “Amendment”) to
Executive Employment Agreement dated as of November 25, 2001, as amended by the
First Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement dated as of July 27, 2004 (as
so amended, the “Agreement”), by and between Providian Financial Corporation, a
Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Joseph W. Saunders (the “Executive”),
is entered into as of October 19, 2004.


 


WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”)
previously determined that it was in the best interest of the Company and its
stockholders to extend the term of the Agreement for an interim period and to
reflect certain other changes; and


 


WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is in the
best interests of the Company and its stockholders to extend the term of the
Agreement for an additional two -year period.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing,
of the mutual provisions contained in this Amendment and of other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows:


 


Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended by
deleting “December 31, 2005” at the end of the first sentence thereof and replacing
such words with “December 31, 2007.”


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive has hereunto set
his hand and, pursuant to authorization from its Board of Directors, the
Company has caused this Amendment to be executed in its name on its behalf, all
as of the date and year first written above.


 


	
   

  	
  PROVIDIAN FINANCIAL
  CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Richard A. Leweke

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Richard A. Leweke

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  Vice Chairman and Chief
  Human

  Resources Officer

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  `

  	
  EXECUTIVE

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  JOSEPH W. SAUNDERS

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/
  Joseph W. Saunders
#### LIBERTY STATE BANK et al. v. GUARDIAN SAVINGS & LOAN ASS’N.

No. 1968-6616.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section A.

May 13, 1936.

Read, Lowrance & Bates, Herbert W. Whisenant, Taylor & Irwin, O. F. Wencker, and W. J. Rutledge, Jr., all of Dallas, for plaintiffs in error.

D. A. Frank, of Dallas, for defendant in error.

HICKMAN, Commissioner.

The Court of Civil Appeals has correctly decided this case. For its opinion, in which the facts are fully stated, see Guardian Savings & Loan Association v. Liberty State Bank et al., 60 S.W.(2d) 823.

A bank paid the check of its depositor upon a forged indorsement of the payee. The jury found the depositor negligent in not sooner discovering the forgery. The Court of Civil Appeals held that the depositor owed no duty to examine the indorsement, and could not therefore be charged with negligence for failure to do so. There was no question but that the depositor promptly notified the bank upon learning that the indorsement was forged. In rendering judgment for the depositor, the court merely reannounced and followed a rule of general acceptation, stated in 3 R.C.L. p. 535, § 165, in this language: “The duty imposed upon the depositor to examine his pass book and vouchers does not extend to an examination of the signatures of the payees on the returned vouchers, as it is the duty of the bank to determine the genuineness of a payee’s indorsement, and the depositor is not expected to know his signature, and the fact that an agent in the employ of the depositor has forged the payee’s indorsement does not affect the rule.”

In addition to the authorities cited in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals, we cite the following: 6 Tex.Jur. p. 308, § 159; 7 C.J. p. 608, § 415; Texas Bank & Trust Co. of Sweetwater v. Withers (Tex.Civ.App.) 60 S.W.(2d) 1061; case notes in 15 A.L.R. 166, and 28 A.L.R. 1437.

The application for writ of error seems not to question the correctness of the general principle announced, but denies its application because of the intervention of an estoppel. Obviously, if the defendant in error owed no duty, to examine the indorsement, and yras, for that reason, not guilty of negligence by delaying to do so, for the same reason it is not estopped to assert the liability of the bank. The only basis of the plea of es-toppel is the finding that the depositor was negligent, and a determination that it was not negligent is necessarily a determination *134that an estoppel cannot be invoked against it. The principle of estoppel in pais may be invoked against a party only when he has failed to do that which it was his duty to do. He cannot be estopped because of his failure to do that which he owed no duty to do.

The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals is affirmed.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.
#### HALEY FISHERIES, Inc., v. PAYNE.

No. 8784.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

April 6, 1932.

Tarlton & Lowe, of Corpus Christi, for appellant.

J. D. Todd and J. D.. Todd, Jr., both of Corpus Christi, for appellee.

SMITH, J.

The appeal presents the sole question of whether the trial judge abused his discretion in overruling appellant’s first application for a continuance. The application was in statutory form, was properly verified, was not controverted, and was overruled without the hearing of any evidence thereon, although the trial judge took cognizance of facts' occurring within his knowledge concerning the setting and resetting of .the case during the term, as these matters related to the' absence of appellant’s leading counsel.

The application for continuance was made upon two grounds: First, the absence of counsel; and, second, the absence of a witness. The absent witness was alleged to be an officer of appellant corporation, and the testimony expected of him was shown to be material, and, if true, would constitute a complete defense to the suit. The diligence exercised by appellant to secure this testimony was alleged as follows:

> “That said witness having been and still being an officer of this defendant corporation, promised and agreed to be present during the trial of this cause and to testify in behalf of defendant, and being in such relation to defendant, defendant was justified and entitled to rely upon the promises of said witness to be present, he being in its employ, and therefore was not required to, and did not, have subpoena, issued for said witness; but said witness has absented himself from the jurisdiction of this court and is not now-available to the defendant as a witness, which fact was not made known to defendant until this case was first called on Tuesday of this week, same being the 19th day of May, 1931, since which time defendant has made diligent efforts to locate said witness and have him present and ready to testify at this trial; that defendant expects to locate said witness and have him present at the next term of this court but that there is no likelihood that said witness will be available to this defendant during the present term of this court. That his absence is not due to the procurement or consent of defend-, ant.”

The facts alleged in the application were in no way controverted by appellee, and consequently must be accepted as true. We think the showing entitled appellant to a con--tinuance. The facts that the witness is an' *438officer of the corporate defendant, that he promised to attend the trial and testify in behalf of appellant, and that appellant relied on that promise, were sufficient to excuse appellant from taking the prescribed statutory steps to enforce the attendance or take the deposition of the witness. Hargrave v. Texas & P. Ry. Co. (Tex. Com. App.) 12 S.W.(2d) 1009.

It is not deemed necessary to discuss the remaining ground upon which continuance was sought.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
#### WILSON LINE, Inc., v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD.

No. 7486.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

July 16, 1940.

Otto Wolff, Jr., of Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner.

Mortimer B. Wolf, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before BIGGS, JONES, and GOODRICH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

It is ordered that the petition of Wilson Line, Inc., praying, inter alia, that the court review and set aside the order of the National Labor Relations Board dated June 10, 1940, be and the same hereby is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JEAN W. PIERRE LOUIS,

Appellant,

v.

NATHALIE L. PIERRE LOUIS,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-2729

[August 28, 2024]

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Kristin R. Kanner, Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE 2021-

0012296.

Stephanie G. Morrow of S.G. Morrow & Associates, P.A., North Miami, 

for appellant. 

No appearance filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Ries v. Ries, 984 So. 2d 612, 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)

(“Because [the appellant] never moved to set aside the default, did not file 

a financial affidavit, and failed to respond to discovery, the trial court 

found that he had either waived or was estopped from presenting evidence 

regarding [the disputed issues]. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial 

court’s actions here.”) (internal quotation marks omitted); Topvalco Inc. v. 

Wolff, 358 So. 3d 747, 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (“Where an error appears 

for the first time on the face of an order, a litigant must move for rehearing, 

to vacate, or for relief from judgment to bring the error to the attention of 

the lower tribunal.”); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 

1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the 

appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so 

as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the 

evidence or by an alternative theory.”).

GERBER, CONNER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *
2

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Post Properties, Inc.
("Post") and Post Apartment Homes, L.P. ("PAH", and together with Post, the
"Registrants") for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
President and Chief Executive Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer of Post
and Post GP Holdings, Inc., PAH's general partner, certifies 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
Registrants.



/s/ David P. Stockert
-------------------------------------
David P. Stockert
President and Chief Executive Officer
(and acting Chief Financial Officer)
August 14, 2003


                                                                            -59-