alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent ofIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 33-71346) pertaining to the Amended and Restated 1991 StockOption Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-71350)pertaining to the 1992 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 33-80213) pertaining to the 1994 Stock Option Plan, in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-80215) pertainingto the 1995 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 333-16349) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan, in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-28971)pertaining to the Houston Biotechnology Incorporated Replacement Stock OptionPlan, the Houston Biotechnology Incorporated 1994A Stock Option Plan, and theHouston Biotechnology Incorporated 1992 Subordinated Stock Option Plan, in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-86117)pertaining to the 1997 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 333-86119) pertaining to the 1999 Stock Option Plan, in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-39084)pertaining to the 2000 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 333-55222) pertaining to the 2000 Non-Director/Officer EmployeeStock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-55224)pertaining to the 2001 Non-Director/Officer Employee Stock Option Plan, in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-72154)pertaining to the 2001 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 333-101698) pertaining to the 2002 New Employee Stock OptionPlan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-91394)pertaining to the 2002 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, in the RegistrationStatement (Form S-8 No. 333-91392) pertaining to the 2001Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-108294)pertaining to the 2001 Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8No. 333-121387) pertaining to the 2004 New Employee Stock OptionPlan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-121388)pertaining to the 2002 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and in the RegistrationStatement (Form S-8 No. 333-125444) pertaining to the2005 Equity Incentive Plan of our reports dated February 28, 2007 withrespect to the consolidated financial statements of Medarex, Inc., Medarex, Inc.management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting ofMedarex, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) forthe year ended December 31, 2006.
|                        | /s/ ERNST &  YOUNG LLP |   |
|------------------------|--------------------------------------|--------|
| MetroPark, New  Jersey |
| March 1,  2007    |

 

----
#### EARY v. STATE.

No. 16628.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 4, 1934.

Gordon & Williams, of Hamilton, for appellant.

Dloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

' The offense is transporting intoxicating liquor; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

'An officer pursued appellant and a companion for several miles. Finally overtaking them, he searched the automobile, and discovered therein twelve gallons of whisky. At the time the search was made, appellant said: “I will take the blame for what I have. It is my car.” It appears that appellant’s companion was driving the car.

In bill of exception No. 1 it is shown that appellant objected to the introduction in evidence of the whisky found in the automobile. The admission of this evidence was not improper. Vaughn v. State, 116 Tex. Cr. R. 334, 28 S.W.(2d) 148.

Bill of exception No. 2 brings forward appellant’s objection to the testimony of the officer that appellant stated to him when he searched the ear that he would take the blame. This testimony was properly receivable, as it is clearly shown to have been res gestse.

Appellant’s first application for a continuance was properly overruled. There was no statement in the application that there was no reasonable expectation that the attendance of the witness could be secured during the term of court by a postponement of the trial to some future day of said term. See article 543, C. O. P.; Branch’s Annotated Penal Code, § 312; Strickland v. State, 13 Tex. App. 369.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approy-ed toy the court.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**576**
**KA 09-00308**

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

TERRY HILL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PHILIP ROTHSCHILD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (VICTORIA M. WHITE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.), rendered April 2, 2001. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of robbery in the first degree, assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [3]). We reject defendant’s contention that he was not afforded the opportunity to testify at trial and that he did not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waive his right to testify at trial. Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant was not required to preserve that contention for our review, we conclude that it is without merit. Defendant waived his constitutional right to be present at the material stages of the criminal proceedings when he requested to be excused from the last part of his trial ( see generally People v Epps , 37 NY2d 343, 348-351, cert denied 423 US 999). Prior to defense counsel’s cross-examination of the final prosecution witness, defendant repeatedly requested to be excused from the proceedings and promised to cause a disruption if he was not allowed to leave. Although County Court did not specifically ask defendant if he was waiving his right to testify, defendant’s responses to the questions of the court demonstrated that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present at the remainder of the trial ( see id. at 350). Also, defense counsel indicated that she discussed defendant’s request with him and that he wished to be excused from the remainder of his trial. Although a court must “ ‘indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver’ ” of a constitutional right ( Johnson v Zerbst , 304 US 458, 464), we conclude that defendant was well aware of the “likely consequence[]” that he**-2- 576** 
**KA 09-00308**

would not be able to testify based on his absence from the proceedings ( Brady v United States , 397 US 742, 748) and that he thereby waived his right to testify ( see Taylor v United States , 414 US 17, 19-20; People v Menner , 2 AD3d 650, lv denied 3 NY3d 678; People v Price , 240 P3d 557, 563 [Colo]).

Entered: May 6, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 21

                               PECO ENERGY COMPANY
                                  Subsidiaries

PECO Energy Power Company
Pennsylvania Corporation
Subsidiaries:
         Susquehanna Power Company
         The Proprietors of the Susquehanna Canal (Inactive)

Susquehanna Electric Company
Maryland Corporation

PECO Wireless, Inc.
Pennsylvania Corporation

The Proprietors of the Susquehanna Canal- (inactive)
Maryland Corporation

Horizon Energy Company (formerly known as PECO Gas Supply Company)
Pennsylvania Corporation

PECO Energy Capital Corp.
Delaware Corporation

Eastern Pennsylvania Development Co.
Subsidiaries:     Adwin Equipment Company
                  Adwin Realty Company
                  Adwin (Schuylkill) Cogeneration, Inc.
                  Buttonwood Associates, Inc.
                  Energy Performance Services, Inc.
                  Route 213 Enterprises, Inc.

Exelon Corporation
Pennsylvania Corporation

Energy Trading Company
Delaware Corporation

Eastern Pennsylvania Exploration Company
Pennsylvania Corporation
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of Colonial Properties Trust, our
general partner, hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:

         (a)      the Form 10-Q of Colonial Realty Limited Partnership for the
                  period ended June 30, 2003 filed on the date hereof with the
                  Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report) fully
                  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (b)      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
                  material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of Colonial Realty Limited Partnership.



                                        /s/ Thomas H. Lowder
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Thomas H. Lowder
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        August 14, 2003
#### SCOTT v. JACKSON et al.

No. 5158.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Amarillo.

Sept. 11, 1939.

Dennis Reynolds, of Wheeler, and J. E Anderson, of Amarillo, for appellant.

Clayton Heare, of Shamrock, for appel-lees.

PER CURIAM.

This case was tried before the court, without the intervention of a jury, on the 18th of May, 1939. Judgment was rendered on that day and entered upon the minutes of the court the next day. Appellant duly excepted and gave notice of appeal but the transcript and statement of facts were not presented to the clerk of this court for filing until July 24, 1939, which was sixty-six days after the final judgment was entered. The case is now before us upon a motion of appellant in which he requests an order permitting the filing of the record as of July 24, 1939, when the same was tendered to the clerk. As grounds for the motion and to show good cause to have existed within the period of sixty days after the final judgment as provided by Art. 1839, R.C.S.192S, as amended by the acts of the 43rd Legislature, p. 142, c. 67, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. art. 1839, he alleges that, due to a situation arising late in the trial over which neither he nor his counsel had control, his counsel discontinued his participation in the trial and appellant thereafter acted as his own counsel. He alleges that he did not have occasion to see his attorney nor to interview him concerning appellate procedure from the date of the trial until ■on or about the 18th of July, 1939, when appellant learned that the transcript and statement of facts had not been perfected and filed in this court.

There are no allegations in the motion which indicate it wás not possible for appellant to see his counsel during this more than sixty day period from May 18th to July 18th and even if such were alleged it would not, in our opinion, show good cause for not filing the record as provided by the rules. His attorney had discontinued his connection with the case and appellant does not allege he depended upon his attorney to have the record prepared and filed. Appellant assumed to conduct the litigation himself, including the preparation of the record for appeal, and the mere fact that he was not familiar with the appellate procedure and did not have occasion to consult his former counsel concerning the same until after the expiration of the sixty day period in which the law requires the transcript to be filed in the appellate court falls far short of the diligence that is required in such matters and fails utterly to show the “good cause” required by the statute. The motion will therefore be overruled. Magee v. Magee, Tex.Civ.App., 272 S.W. 252; Westergreen v. Hobby, Tex.Civ.App., 49 S.W.2d 864.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERETO CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT
ON FORM 10-K FILED ON MARCH 30, 1998.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          TO COME                 DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,926                   3,840
<SECURITIES>                                       559                  11,651
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,527                   9,191
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     15,519                   7,269
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,531                  33,236
<PP&E>                                          40,235                  24,925
<DEPRECIATION>                                (13,195)                (10,167)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,803                  50,609
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,058                   4,013
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            91                      92
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,001                  45,784
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,803                  50,609
<SALES>                                         65,971                  59,943
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                           39,327                  35,032
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,615                  12,337
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 795                   (879)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,338                  14,059
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,162                   5,589
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,176                   8,470
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,176                   8,470
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .67                     .92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .67                     .91
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR BILLING
INFORMATION CONCEPTS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          76,275
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,358
<ALLOWANCES>                                       183
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               194,179
<PP&E>                                          24,973
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,989
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 219,115
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          155,868
<BONDS>                                          2,255
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           327
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,192
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   219,115
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,248
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,185
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  90
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,143
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,290
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,853
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,853
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        

</TABLE>
II 

Calendar No. 492 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3082 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 2, 2016 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

MAY 25, 2016 

Reported by Mr. JOHNSON, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 5919 Chef Menteur Highway in New Orleans, 

Louisiana, as the ‘‘Daryle Holloway Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DARYLE HOLLOWAY POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 5919 Chef Menteur Highway in 

6 New Orleans, Louisiana, shall be known and designated 

7 as the ‘‘Daryle Holloway Post Office Building’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3082 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Daryle Holloway Post 

5 Office Building’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 492 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3082 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostHolloway Post Office Building’’. way in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Daryle al Service located at 5919 Chef Menteur HighMAY 25, 2016 

Reported without amendment 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No. 72-6273.

#### Boyd *v.*New Mexico.

Ct. App. N. M. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>
                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
PECO Energy Company on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-27721, 33-31436, 33-43523,
333-47985, 33-49887, 33-53785, 33-53785-01, 33-54935, 33-59152) and Form S-8
(File Nos. 333-00451, 333-27799, 333-27805, 333-27807, 33-30317, 333-36739,
333-67367) of our report dated February 5, 1999, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of PECO
Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies as of December 31, 1998 and 1997 and for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1998, which report is
included (or incorporated by reference) in this Annual Report on Form 10-K











/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP





Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 30, 1999
# C_2023110EN.01001901.xml

| 24.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 110/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110/19

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.105491

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 110/17)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 15.2.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.105491 |
| Member State | Sweden |
| Region | |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | TCF: Electricity cost aid to certain particularly affected undertakings |
| Legal basis | Förordning om elkostnadsstöd till vissa särskilt drabbade företag |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Overall budget: 2 400 000 000 SEK
  Annual budget: 2 400 000 000 SEK |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2023 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Statens energimyndighet |
| Gredbyvägen 10, 631 04 Eskilstuna |

Date of adoption of the decision

15.2.2023

Aid number

SA.105491

Member State

Sweden

Region

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

TCF: Electricity cost aid to certain particularly affected undertakings

Legal basis

Förordning om elkostnadsstöd till vissa särskilt drabbade företag

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: 2 400 000 000 SEK

Annual budget: 2 400 000 000 SEK

Intensity

Duration

Until 31.12.2023

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Statens energimyndighet

Gredbyvägen 10, 631 04 Eskilstuna

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---