alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Dana S. Philbrook, hereby certify that:



|(1) | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Service Bancorp, Inc.;
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

(3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) The small business issuers other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,
or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business
issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation;

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal controls over financial reporting.

/s/ Dana S. Philbrook

Dana S. Philbrook

Chief Financial Officer

September 18, 2007
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 Ultimate Escapes,
Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Philip Callaghan, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.





November
      23, 2009
              /s/   Philip
      CallaghanPhilip
      CallaghanPrincipal
      Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             216
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      376
<ALLOWANCES>                                         7
<INVENTORY>                                        511
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,142
<PP&E>                                             544
<DEPRECIATION>                                     328
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,966
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              938
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,585
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,966
<SALES>                                          2,546
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,592
<CGS>                                              902
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      902
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,460
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 150
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (922)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (922)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.15)
        




</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1
                                  ------------
 
                               CIT RV TRUST 1998-A
                          ANNUAL OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

                            COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT


      The  undersigned  certifies  that  he  is a  Vice  President  of  The  CIT
Group/Sales Financing, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the state
of Delaware  ("CITSF"),  and that as such he is duly  authorized  to execute and
deliver this  certificate on behalf of CITSF in connection with Section 4.10 (a)
of the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 1, 1998 (the "Agreement"),
among CITSF, The CIT Group Securitization  Corporation II, as Seller, and CIT RV
Trust 1998-A,  for which Bankers Trust  (Delaware) acts as Owner Trustee and The
First National Bank of Maryland acts as Indenture Trustee (all capitalized terms
used herein without  definition having the respective  meanings specified in the
Agreement).  The undersigned  further  certifies to the Owner Trustee and to the
Indenture  Trustee that a review of the activities of CITSF during the preceding
calendar year and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under his
supervision  and to the best of his knowledge,  based on such review,  CITSF has
fulfilled  its  obligations  under the Agreement  during the preceding  calendar
year.


      IN WITNESS  WHEREOF, I have affixed hereto my signature this 10th day of
March, 1999.



                                          /s/ Frank J. Madeira
                                          --------------------------
                                          Name:  Frank J. Madeira
                                          Title: Vice President
#### Isaac Goldman, Appellant, v Sam G. Frankel et al., Defendants, and Song Peng Tang, Respondent.

[773 NYS2d 602]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruditsky, J.), dated February 25, 2003, as granted the motion of the defendant Song Peng Tang for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the complaint is reinstated against the respondent.

The defendant Song Peng Tang failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within *730the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The examining orthopedist and neurologist submitted affirmations indicating, inter alia, that they reviewed the MRI report of the plaintiffs knee, which revealed the existence of a torn meniscus. However, both physicians failed to demonstrate that such injury was not causally related to the subject motor vehicle accident, or that it was not serious within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see Franca v Parisi,*298 AD2d 554 [2002]; *Papadonikolakis v First Fid. Leasing Group,*283 AD2d 470 [2001]). Therefore, we need not consider the sufficiency of the plaintiffs opposition papers *(see Mariaca-Olmos v Mirzrhy,*226 AD2d 437 [1996]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment. Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.
.J


### UN ITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATlON FEDERAL AvtAnON ADMINISTRAnON-MIKE MONAONEY .U:RONAlJTICAL CENTER 

### AIRCRAFT REG I STRATION APP LI CATlON UNITED STATES 

# N R E GISTlRATlON NUMBER AIRCRAFT MAN U FACTURER 

### & MODEL

# D'JI In5p1 ' re 

# 1. AIRCRAFT SERIAL No. 

# W211/CI1. 201001. TYPE OF REG I STRATION (Check One box) 

## FOA M APPROVED OM B No . 2 1 2Q-0042 CEAT : ISS UE DATE
FOR FAA USE ONLY 

# 0 1 . Individual 

# 0 2 . Partnership 

# Ill' 3 . Corporal ion 

# 0 4. Co-Owner 

# D 5. Government 

# 0 8 . Non-Citizen Corporation 

# 0 9. N on - Citizen Corporation Co-Ow ner NAME OR APPLICANT (Persoo(s) shown on evidence of ownership . II individual , g ive l ast name , first name , and m iddle initial.) 

# W i 1'1 

# 9

# mA- 1/er,"a_/

**::r~J ~.**  L.L.C . 32..D 

# z't.. () 7-'8 

# .6 TELEPHONE NUMBER : ( 

### I ADDRESS (P ermanent mailing address fOf' first applicant on list) (If P .O. Box is u sed, p hysical address must also 

### be shown .) Number and street: 

# 113S 

# fl)/"/1 Cree.k.. 

# c,'r-c..le_ Rural Route : 

### P.O. Box : 

# /l:> 

# II CITY ISTAM/0 ZJPCODE



# 5a. **t~T** 

# ClovJ SG-303 0 CHECK HERE IF YOU ARE ONLY REPORTING A CHANGE OF ADDRESS ATTENTION! Read the following statement before signing this application . This portion MUST be completed . A fa l se or dishonest answer to any quest i on i n thi s applicat ion may be grounds for punishm ent by fine and/or imprisonment (U . S. Code, TrUe 18 , 

### Sec. 1 001) .



## CERTIFICATION 1 /V\IE C ERTIFY: l That the above aircraft is owned by the unders igned applicant, who is a citizen (including corporations) of t h e United States. ( For voti ng trust, g i ve name of trustee : 

### ), or: CHECK ONE AS APPROPRIATE : a . 

# 0 A resident alien , with al ien registrati on (Form 1-151 or Form 1-551) No . b . 

# 0 A non-citi zen corporation organ i zed and doing business u n der the laws of (state) and said ai rcraft is based and pr imari ly u sed i n the United States . Record s or flight hours are available for inspection at ( 2) That the a i rcraft i s not registered und er th e laws of any f oreig n country; and (3) That legal evidence of ownersh i p is attached or has 

### been fi led with the Federal Aviation Admin istrat ion. 

### NOTE: If executed for co-ownership a ll applicants mu s t sign . Use reverse side if necessary. TYPE OR PR INT NAME BELOW SIGNATURE



### SIGNATURE **~....-5** 

# -::::z. T I TlE DATE en >- . 

# 0 '-'let' 

# I f>resr'Jed Jll3/z.oJS"

**i~~**



# 5-teF>h~J\ ;::'. (le--.""::li

### Oz~ SIGNATU RE TlTlf DATE 

## .,.oo a:;::::w 

## <<Z 0.()(!) 

### :r:i(i) S IGNATU RE TlTlE 

### DATE 

## oa...,

**;5~m** NOTE Pendi ng receipt of the Certificate of Aircraft Reg istration , the 

### airctaft may 

### be operated for a period not 

### In

**tzoe~~** 

### of go days , 

### during which time the 

### PINK copy of this application must 

### be 

### carried i n the 

### Ua'lh . 

### AC Form 8050-1 (5112) (NSN 0052-<XHi2S-9007)
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 322 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 322

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend title 4, United States Code, to add the Martin Luther King Jr. 
  holiday to the list of days on which the flag should especially be 
                               displayed.

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

SECTION 1. ADDITION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. HOLIDAY TO LIST OF DAYS.

    Section 6(d) of title 4, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday, third Monday in 
January;'' after ``January 20;''.

            Passed the Senate June 14, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 322

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend title 4, United States Code, to add the Martin Luther King Jr. 
  holiday to the list of days on which the flag should especially be 
                               displayed.
```
## NO. 12

- 15

- 00063

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE:
ERIC MAULDIN,

RELATOR §
§
§ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM In this original proceeding, Relator, Eric Mauldin, purports to peti tion for writs of mandamus and prohibition. In substance, however, he seeks relief from at least one final felony
conviction. Therefore , we construe his petition as a request for postconviction habeas relief. A writ of habeas corpus is the exclusive mea ns to challenge a final felony conviction.
T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 11.07 § 3 (West Supp. 2014); Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Eighth Dist. Court of Appeals , 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). But only the court of criminal ap peals has jurisdiction to grant postconviction habeas relief from a final felony conviction. See Keene , 910 S.W.2d at 483. Accordingly, we dismiss Relator’s postconviction petition for writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction

. Opinion delivered Mar ch 18, 2015. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

MARCH 1 8 , 2015

NO. 12

- 15

- 00063

- CR

ERIC M AULDIN, Relator V. HON. JACK SKEEN, JR. , Respondent

O RIGINAL P ROCEEDING
ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus (construed as a petition for postconviction habeas relie f ) filed by ERIC MAULDIN ; who is the
relator in Cause No. 007

- 1313

- 04 , pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of
Smith County, Texas. Said petition having been filed herein on March 12, 2015 , and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that this Court does n ot have jurisdiction , it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
MOVESRunID

iterationIDyearID monthID dayID day desc hourID stateID countyID zoneID linkID 1 1 2010 7 5weekday 45 45091 1 1 2010 7 5weekday 45 45091 1 1 2010 7 5weekday 45 45091 1 1 2010 7 5weekday 45 45091pollutantIDpollutant desc processID sourceTypeID fuelTypeID modelYearID roadTypeID SCC emissionQuant

uits emissionQuantMean

emissionQuantSigma 87VOC 3553.76 kg/ 24hr day 79 non-methane hydrocarbons 3585.93 kg/ 24hr day 3 Nox 10929.8 kg/ 24hr day 1total gaseous hyrdrocarbons 3778.23 kg/ 24hr day
Exhibit 99.21

CONSENT OF ENGINEER

Ladies and
Gentlemen:

The undersigned company hereby consents to (1) the references to the undersigned companys name included or incorporated by reference
in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp. in connection with the report entitled The NI 43-101 Technical Report Mineral Resource Estimate for the Mutanga Project, Zambia, Africa dated September 12, 2013 and
(2) all other references to the undersigned company included or incorporated by reference in the registration statement in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp.

Dated: March 19, 2014



|                     |  |                   
|-------------------- |  | ------------------
|CSA GLOBAL (UK) LTD.
|                     | 
|By:                  |  | /s/ Malcolm Titley
|Name:                |  | Malcolm Titley    
|Title:               |  | Director/Principal
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2846

To extend the suspension of duty for certain chemicals.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 11, 2000

Mr. ROCKEFELLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To extend the suspension of duty for certain chemicals.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DUTY SUSPENSION.

4 Subheading 9902.32.06 of the Harmonized Tariff

5 Schedule of the United States is amended by striking

6 ‘‘12/31/2000’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2003’’.

Æ
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 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350 as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  in  connection  with the  filing of the  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarter  Ended  November 30, 2009 (the  "Report") by
Progressive  Training,  Inc.  ("Registrant"),  the undersigned  hereby certifies
that:

1.       to the  best of my  knowledge,  the  Report  fully  complies  with  the
         requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
         of 1934; and

2.       to the best of my knowledge,  the  information  contained in the Report
         fairly presents, in all material respects,  the financial condition and
         results of operations of Registrant.

         January 12, 2010               By:  /S/ BUDDY YOUNG
                                        ---------------------------------
                                        Buddy Young
                                        Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                        Financial Officer
#### Tilford v. The Fairfield Manuf’g Co.

1. Contract for Services: breach by employer: damages: general and special verdicts. Action for damages for being “laid, off” and then discharged under an alleged contract for constant employment. The court instructed that, if the contract was as alleged in the petition, defendant was bound to give plaintiff steady work so long as it continued him in its employ; and that, if it, without entirely releasing him from the engagement, laid him off for a time, it was responsible to him for his wages during that time; but that, if the employment was for an indefinite period, it had the right to terminate it at any time. The jury found for the plaintiff for the amount of his wages while laid off; and they also found specially that the employment was not for any definite period. *Held*that, under the instruction, the general verdict was not inconsistent with the special finding.

*Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.*

Friday, June 17.

It is alleged in tbe petition tbat plaintiff was employed by defendant to work for it at an agreed salary, and that the agreement was tbat he was to be given steady and constant employment; and it is charged tbat defendant violated its undertaking, in that it laid plaintiff off from December 24, 18S4, to February 1, 1885, and afterwards wrongfully discharged him from the service. This action was brought for the recovery of the damages sustained by plaintiff in consequence of these breaches of the contract. There was a general verdict for plaintiff, and the jury found specially that the employment was not for any definite period. Defendant moved for judgment on the special finding, on the ground that, upon the fact found thereby, plaintiff was not entitled to recover. ■ The circuit court overruled this motion, and *61rendered judgment for plaintiif on the general verdict, and defendant appeals.

*Leggett &*McKemey, for appellant.

*M. A. McCoid,*for appellee.

Reed, J.

The circuit court instructed the jury that, if the contract was as alleged in the petition, defendant was bound to give plaintiif steady work so long as it continued him in its employ; and that if it, without entirely releasing him from the engagement, laid .him off for a time, it was responsible to him for his wages during that time; but that, if the employment was for an indefinite period, it had the right to terminate it at any time. Eo exception was taken to this instruction, and the giving of it has not been assigned as error. We will assume, therefore, that it is correct. The evidence is not all set out in the abstract, and we will assume, also, that it was based upon the evidence in the case. Under it the jury were warranted in awarding plaintiif damages to the extent'of the amount of his wages during the time he was laid' off. The sum awarded is not in excess of that amount. There is therefore no inconsistency between the general and special verdicts.

AFFIRMED.