alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 302 OFSARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
I, Edward V. Lett, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TIB Financial Corp.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused, such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: November 10, 2004
/s/ Edward V. LettEdward V. Lett,
<PAGE>
                                PEERLESS MFG. CO.
                         2002 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

 EXHIBIT 23



               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We have issued our report dated August 30, 2002 accompanying the consolidated
financial statements included in the Annual Report of Peerless Mfg. Co. on Form
10-K for the year ended June 30, 2002. We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of said report in the Registration Statement of Peerless Mfg. Co. on
Form S-8 (File No. 333-17229, effective November 12, 1999 and File No.
333-76754, effective January 15, 2002).


                                       /s/ Grant Thornton LLP


Dallas, Texas
August 30, 2002




                                       52
**EXHIBIT 23.2REPORT ON SCHEDULES OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP**

 

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT**

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders ofAcceptance Insurance Companies Inc. and Subsidiaries

We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Acceptance InsuranceCompanies Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and for eachof the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001, and have issued ourreport thereon dated March 20, 2002; such financial statements and report areincluded in your 2001 Annual Report to Stockholders and are incorporated hereinby reference.  Our audits also included the financial statement schedulesof Acceptance Insurance Companies Inc. and subsidiaries, listed in Item14.  These financial statement schedules are the responsibility of theCompany's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based onour audits.  In our opinion, such financial statement schedules, whenconsidered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as awhole, present fairly in all material respects the information set forththerein.

 

 

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Omaha, NebraskaMarch 20, 2002
#### SMITH v. STATE.

No. 18482.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 2, 1936.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 13, 1937.

Oscar Callaway, of Comanche, for appellant.

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

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is burglary; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

After a re-examination of the record in the light of the motion for rehearing filed by counsel for the State, it is imperative that this court set aside the order of reversal and affirm the judgment of conviction.

The record before us is quite confusing. The indictment was filed October 29, 1935. The verdict was rendered November 13, 1935. Sentence was pronounced and the judgment became final December 12, 1935. The motion for new trial was filed November 15, 1935, but the record is silent as ■to the court’s action thereon. Six bills of exception are found in the record. They were filed March 16, 1936. The statement of facts was filed on the same date. The transcript fails to show when the court commenced, although the caption states that the court adjourned January 11, 1936. The bills of exception were filed too late for consideration, as the thirty days allowed by law from the adjournment of court expired February 11, 1936. \

Upon the record as now presented, we are constrained to withdraw the original opinion, to set aside the reversal, and to order an affirmance of the judgment, which is accordingly done.

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, Judge.

The opinion affirming the judgment was rendered on December 2, 1936. On December 28, 1936, the clerk of this court received from appellant’s attorney a motion for rehearing. It reached the clerk eleven days too late. The reasons set forth in the motion attempting to excuse the delay are not regarded as sufficient, and even if they were, the facts stated in the motion are in no way verified. We further observe that appellant’s motion for new trial setting up new evidence which was not available to appellant upon the trial was not sworn to. This has always been held necessary. See Denning v. State, 120 Tex.Cr.R. 122, 48 S.W.(2d) 643, and cases therein cited.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
# C_2022427EN.01000701.xml

| 9.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/7

---

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2021

(2022/C 427/07)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://www.cepol.europa.eu/who-we-are/key-documents/annual-accounts

---
ORIGINA1 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 23-0420 

RASTA KHALID WALID, 

Plaintiff and Appellant, 

v. 

STATE OF MONTANA, ATTORNEY 

GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, CHILD 

SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, OFFICE 

OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE, 

Defendants and Appellees. 

ORDER 

Appellant Rasta Khalid Walid was granted an extension of time to file and serve his 

opening brief on or before May 7, 2024. Walid did not thereafter file the opening brief and 

on June 5, 2024, this Court ordered that Walid file the opening brief no later than July 3, 

2024. Nothing further has been filed. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to all parties of record. 

DATED this MD day of July, 2024. 

FILED 

JUL 16 2024 

Bowen Greenwood 

Clerk of Supreme Court 

Stata of Monts na 

ief Justice 

/4-6 /-2-, 

07/16/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0420
**Exhibit 23**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 002-82117, 033-24646, 333-40370, 333-116362, and 333-138411, on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 27, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Perini Corporation, and the effectiveness of Perini Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Perini Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2008.

 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

 

Boston, Massachusetts

February 27, 2009
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2928 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 491
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2928

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 19, 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 201 B Street in Perryville, Arkansas, as the ``Harold George Bennett 
                             Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. HAROLD GEORGE BENNETT POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 201 B Street in Perryville, Arkansas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Harold George Bennett Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Harold 
George Bennett Post Office''.
                                                       Calendar No. 491

114th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2928

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 201 B Street in Perryville, Arkansas, as the ``Harold George Bennett 
                             Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 25, 2016

                       Reported without amendment
```
*EXHIBIT 32.2*

* *

*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 Zones, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald P. McFadden, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:*

* *

*            (1)        The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); 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: May 11, 2005*

* *

* *

| * * | * * | */S/   RONALD P MCFADDEN* |
|----------|----------|------------------------------------------|
| * * | * * | *Ronald P. McFadden*                     |
| * * | * * | *Chief Financial Officer*                |
|          |          |                                          |

* *

* *

* *

* *
### 52

**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS**
AUSTIN

**Honorable** 

### Jallan uontgoniery state Rlghway pgin0.r 

## ALwtln,rexa OIar sir:

poreted under members are a tions arm co 

### Rioarande Valley tlng exahangr inooorTexas and that it6 wers, whloh assoolaengaged in oitrur hr Exohan@ own8 pro4uots or a.0 momnts ror procsaslxlg. nsweied 10 whether or aot, the Eio annde"Valle~ Citrur 0 iI5 truokr 0laOrlilOd 

### ana regr raid Artiole 667Sa44i.

rtiole reads as rolor thr Act borrby 8aonded

. . . .*Honorable Jallan L'oatgoE;ary, Pag5 R

While there hare **beea** ao doola101~ 

### oolutrulne this rrtlole lakatioa or m~lrtrarloa were **wed** to **hots** Hated **qaertfon~ but**  a rlose **roadin** thereof dlsoloses **that** thj



### thr 4gIslaturs was to grant a reduotloa la isa8 **to** owners of oommrrolal rrhlolas whioh traarport the ornon own farm prodootr.The roveal that the Ecohango ouns the truoks la do not own the produots sought to be oontop l d aad thsnfore oaaaot oome wIthIn ths purview or Arti010 667&I-da, Khlle it 18 true the gxohango la mood in a literal sons8 **b7 tb**  **f8nmn** thsmssives 

### the same door not take thm bohange 

### out of the rule that a rorporatloa Is la it60ir a legal 

### l nt1t.f. Thsrrfon; the truoks sannot be oon6trwd as bolng owned by the ramsrs thsmrslvss.

Tou are, thonfoh adrirea that uador the raotr stated in rour requart the Rio Orando Valley Citrus Exohange is not 

### l

atltlod to a alassifIoatIoa 

### ana roauotlon of lioonso isss as oontunplatad by Article 667Sa4a or thr Rorlsed Civil **Statutes** of Toxa‘.

Trustlag that thr aboro fully la5wer8 Tour law-7, - lr* fours verytruly A- QW’ISRAL

OI TEXAS 

# &ii%?&

AAstaat

APPROVEI’:Sn 15, 1939

**COM~~ITTEE** ATTORNEY GENERAL 03 -
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 99


REVIEW REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
TIB FINANCIAL CORP.



TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS
OF TIB FINANCIAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES


         We have reviewed the condensed consolidated balance sheets of TIB
Financial Corp. and subsidiaries as of March 31, 2001 and the related condensed
consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders' equity and cash
flows for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2001 and 2000 included in the
accompanying Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2001. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Company's management.

         We conducted our reviews in accordance with standards established by
the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to
financial data, and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and
accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted
in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards in the United States
of America, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding
the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such
an opinion.

         Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications
that should be made to the condensed consolidated financial statements referred
to above for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.

         We have previously audited, in accordance with generally accepted
auditing standards, the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2000, and
the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders' equity,
and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our
report dated February 16, 2001, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those
consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in
the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2000
is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the consolidated
balance sheet from which it has been derived.


/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
---------------------
Atlanta, Georgia
May 15, 2001


                                      20
Exhibit 23(d)



[PRATOR BETT, L.L.C. LETTERHEAD]



CONSENT OF PRATOR BETT, L.L.C.

As oil and gas consultants, we hereby consent to the use of our name and our reports dated October 28, 2003 in this Form 10-K, incorporated by reference into Peoples Energy Corporation's previously filed Registration Statement File Nos. 2-82760, 33-6369, 333-17701, 333-84594, 333-70702, and 333-62070.

| | Prator Bett, L.L.C.          
| | -----------------------------
| |                              
| | By /s/ M. Drayton Prator, III
| | M. Drayton Prator, III, PE   
| | Partner                      

Houston, Texas
December 9, 2003
#### NALL v. MALLEY et ux.

No. 2420.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Dec. 15, 1932.

E. L. Nall, of Beaumont, for appellant.

E. M. Venable, of Beaumont, for appel-lees.

WALKER, C. J.

By their petition filed in this case, appel-lees alleged that they were the owners of certain real estate in the city of Beaumont; that appellant held notes against this property in the sum of more than $1,700; that appellant was about to foreclose his lien against this property; and further, certain facts as a basis for enjoining appellant from foreclosing his lien. On the facts alleged, they made the following prayer: “Wherefore plaintiffs pray that they be granted a writ of injunction against defendant, and that he be enjoined and restrained from selling-said property as aforesaid, or any part thereof. That defendants be cited to appear and answer this petition, and that on final hearing defendants be enjoined from making such foreclosure and said sale for a period of ninety days from the date of filing this petition, and for such other relief general and special as plaintiffs may show themselves entitled.”

Upon presentation of their petition to the district judge of the Fifty-Eighth district court of Jefferson county, he indorsed thereon his fiat, as follows:

> “State of Texas, County of Jefferson

> “At Chambers This 27th day of October, 1932.

> “The above petition having been presented to and heard by the judge of the 58th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas, at chambers, this 27th day of October, 1932, and it appearing to him from the facts stated therein that the plaintiff, applicant is entitled to a temporary restraining order, that same is within complainants allegations and prayer, that delay will not be injurious to either party, and that justice may be sub-served thereby, it is accordingly ordered that the clerk of this court issue a temporary restraining order, operative until and pending the hearing below ordered, restraining defendants from selling or in any way disposing of the property described in said petition upon plaintiffs executing a good and sufficient bond, with two or more sufficient securities in the sum of $100.00 conditioned as the law requires. The Clerk shall quote this fiat and embody such order in a writ, which shall also require defendants to appear in court on the 15 day of Nov. 1932, to show cause why injunction should not be granted upon such petition as set forth in the prayer thereof.”

Appellant perfected his appeal from the above order by filing in the trial court his ap* peal bond on the 28th day of October, 1932, and by filing the transcript in this cause on the 28th of October, 1932.

Opinion.

We sustain appellees’ motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the order appealed from is a temporary restraining order and not a temporary injunction. A temporary restraining order will not support an appeal. For a discussion of the distinction between a temporary restraining order and a temporary injunction see the opinion of this court in C. V. Terrell et al. v. Alpha Petroleum Company, 54 S.W.(2d) 821.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 295 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 295

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 13, 2016

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To reauthorize the Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
                     Historic Preservation program.

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

SECTION 1. HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES HISTORIC 
              PRESERVATION PROGRAM REAUTHORIZED.

    Section 507(d)(2) of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management 
Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 302101 note) is amended by striking the period 
at the end and inserting ``and each of fiscal years 2017 through 
2023.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 12, 2016.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          12,077
<SECURITIES>                                     6,669
<RECEIVABLES>                                       37
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                         58
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,000
<PP&E>                                           1,800
<DEPRECIATION>                                     600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,271
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              941
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,493
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    20,271
<SALES>                                             28
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    28
<CGS>                                              224
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      224
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,584
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,780)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,780)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,484)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.35)
        

</TABLE>