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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THERMO OPTEK
CORPORATION'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 28, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1997
<CASH>                                          81,771
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  100,855
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,793
<INVENTORY>                                     82,683
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               281,663
<PP&E>                                          90,161
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,267
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 617,309
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          241,166
<BONDS>                                          1,792
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           485
<OTHER-SE>                                     260,578
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   617,309
<SALES>                                        223,192
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               223,192
<CGS>                                          119,943
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,943
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,975
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   114
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,884
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 32,767
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,090
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             18,677
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,677
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .37
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                            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 ICT Group, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Vincent A.
Paccapaniccia, Executive Vice President, Corporate Finance and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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.





October 24, 2002                          /s/ Vincent A. Paccapaniccia
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Vincent A. Paccapaniccia
                                          Executive Vice President, Corporate
                                          Finance and Chief Financial Officer
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order 

April 28, 2008 

135123 

135124
 135125 

(55) 

LISA D. WYATT, Successor 

Personal Representative of the Estate

of William Nolan Wyatt, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v 

OAKWOOD HOSPITAL AND 

MEDICAL CENTERS, a/k/a OAKWOOD 

HEALTHCARE, INC., PARVEZ KAHN, M.D., 

and THOMAS AUSTIN CHAPEL, 

M.D., 

 Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

 SC: 135123, 135124, 135125 

 COA: 263370, 263372, 263375 

Wayne CC: 04-402043-NH 

On order of the Court, the motion for review of taxation of costs is considered, and 

it is DENIED. 

l0421 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

April 28, 2008 

 Clerk
#### FORTUNE v. STATE.

No. 16174.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 13, 1933.

Tom P. Scott, of Waco, for appellant. Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

- HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for misdemeanor swindling, punishment being a fine of $25 and ten days in jail.

Prosecution was based upon a complaint and information which charged that in payment for certain described property appellant executed a check for $19.50 drawn on the “Citizens National Bank in Waco,” it being alleged that at the time said check was given appellant “did not have on deposit in said bank sufficient funds to pay said check, and had no good reason to believe said check would be paid when the same would in the ordinary course of business be presented to said bank for payment.” It is further alleged that said check was presented to said bank for payment, which was refused for want of sufficient funds to the credit of the drawer of the check.

Appellant urges that the evidence does not support the conviction. The contention must be sustained. After detailing the transaction which resulted in the giving of the check to him, Mr. Rosener testified that he deposited the check in his bank in Temple; that it was returned unpaid; that he again deposited it in the Temple bank, and it was again returned unpaid; and that he had never received payment thereon. The witness further testified that he did not know why the check was returned unpaid. There is not one word of testimony in the record to indicate that said check was ever presented for payment to the Waco bank upon which it was drawn. There is an entire failure to prove the averment in the pleadings that it was so presented.

The prosecution was under the provisions of subdivision 4, art. 1546, P. C. The Legislature, in undertaking to make the happening of certain things “prima facie” evidence of certain other things, said, “provided, that if said check * * * is not paid on *presentation*the return of same shall be prima facie evidence,” etc. We are not called upon to determine the validity of the' proviso just quoted, and disclaim any intention to do so, but refer to it as clearly showing that the “presentation” mentioned could refer to and mean only presentation for payment to the bank upon which the cheek was drawn. See Boone v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 61 S.W.(2d) 103; Pruitt v. State, 83 Tex. Cr. R. 148, 202 S. W. 81; Clark v. State, 102 Tex. Cr. R. 88, 277 S. W. 132; Ariola v. State, 105 Tex. Cr. R. 563, 289 S. W. 385.

On account of the evidence failing to support the conviction, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
ex10_4.htm


     

    Exhibit 10.4

     


    FIRST AMENDMENT TO

    ENERGY
PARTNERS, LTD.

    AMENDED
AND RESTATED 2000 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN FOR

    NON-EMPLOYEE
DIRECTORS

     

    The
Energy Partners, Ltd. Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employee Directors is hereby amended in the following respects:

     

    1. Section 4
of Article V is amended by adding the following sentence at the end
thereof:

     

    “Payment
shall be made on such date on or after the Payment Event as the Plan
Administrator shall determine but no later than ninety (90) days after the
occurrence of the Payment Event.”

     

    2. Article
VI is amended by adding the following sentence at the end thereof:

     

    “Anything
in the Plan to the contrary notwithstanding, no adjustment shall be made
pursuant to this Article VI that causes any award that is not otherwise deferred
compensation subject to Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the “Code”), to become deferred compensation subject to Section 409A of
the Code.”

     

    3. Article
VII is amended by adding the following new Section 3:

     

    “3.           Internal Revenue Code Section
409A.  It is intended that any stock options granted under the
Plan not constitute deferred compensation subject to Section 409A of the Code,
and the Plan shall be interpreted and operated consistently with that
intent.  In the event that it shall be determined that any payments or
benefits payable to an Eligible Director under the Plan constitute non-qualified
deferred compensation covered by Code Section 409A for which no exemption under
Code Section 409A or the regulations thereunder is available (“Covered Deferred
Compensation”), then notwithstanding anything in the Plan to the contrary, the
Eligible Director shall be deemed to have ceased to be a Director for purposes
of the Plan if and only if the Eligible Director has experienced a “separation
from service” within the meaning of said Section 409A and the regulations
thereunder.  The provisions of the Plan

     


    
      
         


      

      
         


        
          

        

      

      
         


      

    


    relating
to such Covered Deferred Compensation shall be interpreted and operated
consistently with the requirements of Code Section 409A and the regulations
thereunder.”

     

    


    
      
         

        Dated:
November 13, 2008

        
          	 
      	
                  ENERGY
      PARTNERS, LTD.

                   

                   

                  By:  /s/ John H. Peper        

                          John
      H. Peper

                          Executive
      Vice President, General

                          Counsel
      and Corporate Secretary
#### WELLS v. THOMPSON et al.

No. 3213.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.

June 6, 1935.

Rehearing Denied July 3, 1935.

Rosser Thomas, of Houston, for appellant.

Foster T. Bean, of Kilgore, and Brach-field &' Wolfe, of Henderson, for appel-lees.

HIGGINS, Justice.

This is a suit by Dora Wells against S. C. Thompson and his assignees to have declared a forgery a mineral deed purporting to be executed by plaintiff conveying to Thompson a three-eighths interest in the royalty reserved in an oil and gas lease upon a tract of land owned by plaintiff. It was sought to have said deed and assignments executed by Thompson canceled and removed as a cloud upon plaintiffs title.

Defendants answered by exceptions, general denial, and specially denied that the deed was a forgery.

Upon trial without a jury judgment was rendered for defendants.

The questions here presented call for no discussion. It will suffice to merely state our conclusions.

1. The judgment was that plaintiff take nothing by her suit and that defendants go hence without day. This completely disposes of all issues tendered by the pleadings and the suggestion that such judgment is not final is untenable.

2. The two descriptions of the land incorporated in the judgment simply follow the alternative descriptions contained in the plaintiff’s petition.

3.The evidence amply supports the view that the deed was executed and delivered by plaintiff for which reason the assignment ' questioning the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment is overruled.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2490 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2490

 To amend the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 to modify 
             requirements related to mortgage disclosures.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 5, 2018

 Mr. Scott (for himself and Mr. Jones) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 to modify 
             requirements related to mortgage disclosures.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``TRID Improvement Act of 2018''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.

    Section 4(a) of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 
(12 U.S.C. 2603(a)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``itemize all charges'' and inserting 
        ``itemize all actual charges'';
            (2) by striking ``and all charges imposed upon the seller 
        in connection with the settlement and'' and inserting ``and the 
        seller in connection with the settlement. Such forms''; and
            (3) by inserting after ``or both.'' the following: 
        ``Charges for any title insurance premium disclosed on such 
        forms shall be equal to the amount charged for each individual 
        title insurance policy, subject to any discounts as required by 
        State regulation or the title company rate filings.''.
                                 <all>
```
2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 8-11-2008 

# M cKinley v . S ecret ary Arm

y P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 07-1576

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" M cKinley v

. S e cr e t a r y Arm

y " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 688. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/688NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o: 07- 1576 E VE L YN MCKI NL E Y, A ppel l ant
v. S E CR E T AR Y OF T HE UNI T E D S T AT E S AR M Y,

A ppel l ee A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( 04- C V - 00222) D istric t C o u rt: H o n . S e a n J. M c L a u g h lin Subm i t t ed J ul y21, 2008 Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a) B efore: M cK E E , F U E N T E S , and JO R D A N , C i rcui tJudg es,

( Fi l ed: A ugus t11, 2008 )

OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

M c K e e , C i r cui tJudge .E vel yn M cK i nl eyappea l s t he di s t r i ctcour t ' s gr antof s um m aryj udgm enti n favor

of herempl oy er , t he U ni t ed St at es A r m y , i n t he gende rdi s cr i m i nat i on act i on s he fi l ed
u n d e rTi t l e VI I o f

t h e Ci v i l Ri g h t s Ac to f 1 9 6 4 , 4 2 U. S . C. § 2 0 0 0 ( e ) . W e wi l l a f f i r m. I n a s mu c h a s we wr i t e p r i ma r i l yf o rt h e p a r t i e s wh o a r e f

a mi l i a rwi t h t h i s c a s e , we need notr eci t e the fa ctual orpr ocedur al backgr ound of thi s di s put e. W e have r evi ew ed t he thor ough and thought ful R epor tand R ecomm endat i on w hi ch the M agi s t r at e J udge f iled o n D e c e m b e r 1 3 , 2 0 0 6 , an d th e d istric t co u rt a d o p ted o n F e b ru a ry6 , 2 0 0 7 . T h a t R e p o rt a n d R e c o m m e n d a tio n f u llya n d a c c u ra telye x p lain s w h yth e A rm yw a s e n tit led to s u mm a r yj u d g me n t , a n d we c a n a d d l i t t l e t o t h a ta n a l y s i s a n d d i s c u s s i o n . Ac c o r d i n g l y , we w i l l aff i r m s ubs t ant i al l yfort he r eas ons s etfor t h i n t he af or ement i oned R epor tand R ecomm endat i on.
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
  Form 10-K
      Dated: March 31, 2010

/s/ GARY H. SCHOENFELDGary H. SchoenfeldPresident, Chief Executive Officer and DirectorPacific Sunwear of California, Inc.(Principal Executive Officer)Dated: March 31, 2010

/s/ MICHAEL L. HENRYMichael L. HenrySenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer andSecretaryPacific Sunwear of California, Inc.(Principal Financial Officer)   Form 10-K
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF POST PROPERTIES, INC. FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000903127
<NAME> POST PROPERIES, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       4,060,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                   1,228,647,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             191,632,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,063,141,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                    510,637,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     10,000
<COMMON>                                       221,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 401,771,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,063,141,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           138,161,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               70,682,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          16,722,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             44,385,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         36,148,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 75,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                36,073,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.62
        

</TABLE>
#### George P. COLEMAN, J. Harvie Wilkinson, Jr., and John F. Wilmeth, Bondholders’ Committee for the First Mortgage 61⁄2 Per Cent Sinking Fund Convertible Gold Bonds of Hartsville Print and Dye Works, and Trust Company of South Carolina, as Trustee, Appellants, v. HARTSVILLE PRINT & DYE WORKS, Appellee. In the Matter of HARTSVILLE PRINT & DYE WORKS, Debtor.

No. 4505.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Oct. 16, 1939.

E. Randolph Williams and Lewis F. Powell, Jr., both of Richmond, Va., Nathaniel B. Barnwell and Ben Scott Whaley, both of Charleston, S. C., and John F. Wilmeth, of Hartsville, S. C., for appellants.

Norman S. Goetz, of New York City, Benet, Shand & McGowan, of Columbia, S. C., Waring & Brockinton and John I. Cosgrove, all of Charleston, S. C., and M. S. Mattuck, of New York City, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed but without prejudice, by agreement of the parties. Order filed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project Nos. 77-316, 96-050, 137-216, 175-030, 233-245, 606-041, 619-175, 803-119, 1061-105, 1121-137, 1354-133, 1962-221, 1988-102, 2105-129, 2106-077, 2107-051, 2130-125, 2310-252, 2661-094, 2687-189, 2735-102, and 14531-002]

On December 13, 2022, Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Pacific Generation LLC (applicants) filed a joint application for approval to transfer the following licenses:

Potter Valley Project No. 77,

Kerckhoff Project No. 96,

Mokelumne River Project No. 137,

Balch Project No. 175,

Pit 3, 4, and 5 Project No. 233,

Kilarc-Cow Creek Project No. 606,

Bucks Creek Project No. 619,

DeSabla-Centerville Project No. 803,

Phoenix Project No. 1061,

Battle Creek Project No. 1121,

Crane Valley Project No. 1354,

Rock Creek-Cresta Project No. 1962,

Haas-Kings River Project No. 1988,

Upper North Fork Feather River Project No. 2105,

McCloud-Pit Project No. 2106,

Poe Project No. 2107,

Spring Gap-Stanislaus Project No. 2130,

Upper Drum-Spaulding Project No. 2310,

Hat Creek Project No. 2661,

Pit No. 1 Project No. 2687,

Helms Pumped Storage Project No. 2735, and

Lower Drum Project No. 14531

On August 12, 2024, applicants filed a notice of withdrawal of their application.

                    No motion in opposition to the notice of withdrawal has been filed, and the Commission has taken no action to disallow the withdrawal. Pursuant to Rule 216(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure,[1]                                          the withdrawal of the application became effective on August 27, 2024, and this proceeding is hereby terminated.                

Dated: September 6, 2024.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Acting Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                             18 CFR 385.216(b) (2023).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2024-20766 Filed 9-12-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P