alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Touchmark Bancshares, Inc. (the Company), each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this certification:



| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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 result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                              
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: November 14, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    William R. Short      
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | William R. Short             
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 14, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Robert D. Koncerak    
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Robert D. Koncerak           
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Financial         
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Ckruch, Inc. (the ‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December  31,  2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jan E. Chanson, Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company. |

|                      |  |  |        |  |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|----------------------|--|--|--------|--|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated: April 4, 2007 |  |  | By:    |  |  | /s/ Jan E. Chason                                          |
|                 |  |  |   |  |  | Jan E. Chason Executive Vice President& Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
|                      |

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form with the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00003-CR

Norma DeLeon

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 19FC-0474-B

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

September 24, 2020
NUMBER 13-23-00284-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

 

ELYJAH ABDUAL FORD, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

 

On appeal from the 23rd District Court

of Wharton County, Texas.

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Silva and Peña 

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s motion to dismiss this appeal. The 

motion was signed by both counsel and the appellant. We find the motion meets the 

requirement of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) that appellant and attorney 

must sign a written motion to dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). 
2

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is granted. Without passing on the merits of the 

case, the appeal is hereby dismissed. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request,

no motion for rehearing will be entertained.

CLARISSA SILVA

Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the

12th day of October, 2023.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF SILVER CINEMAS INTERNATIONAL, INC. AS OF
DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND THE RELATED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE-MONTH PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,025,754
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    543,656
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,649,870
<PP&E>                                      76,341,472
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,252,765
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             134,261,970
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      133,754,620
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 36,147,036
<COMMON>                                         1,451
<OTHER-SE>                                (41,282,218)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               134,261,970
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           106,080,948
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              116,832,330
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          11,676,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (11,875,474)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (11,875,474)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (11,875,474)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
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








In connection with the Amended Quarterly Report of Lake Victoria Mining Company, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A-1 for the period end of June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the “report”), I, Roger A. Newell, Chief Executive Officer and 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; and





(2)
The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 7th day of September, 2010.








ROGER A. NEWELLRoger A. NewellChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Moorby v. Heller, 507-8-16 Wncv (Teachout, J., Jan. 17, 2018). 

[The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the 

accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is not guaranteed.]

STATE OF VERMONT

SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION

Washington Unit Docket No. 507-8-16 Wncv

JAMIE MOORBY

v.

JOAN HELLER

Plaintiff’s Amended Motion to Compel Discovery, filed November 27, 2017 (MPR #5)

Plaintiff Jamie Moorby claims that she was injured when Defendant Joan Heller, operator 

of the car in which they were traveling, drove off the side of the road and crashed the car. She 

claims that the circumstances entitle her to punitive as well as compensatory damages. In 

connection with her punitive damages claim, she sought discovery regarding Ms. Heller’s 

wealth. Ms. Heller has resisted those efforts, causing Ms. Moorby to file this motion.

The parties dispute whether Plaintiff should be required to make a threshold showing of a 

basis for punitive damages before being able to conduct wealth discovery. They further dispute, 

if she is required to do so, whether the Plaintiff’s evidence should meet any required threshold.

Some courts require a threshold showing before permitting wealth discovery for punitive 

damages purposes; some do not. See, e.g., 1 Punitive Damages: Law and Practice 2d § 9:9 (2017 

ed.); 2 Modern Tort Law: Liability and Litigation § 21:52 (2d ed.); 1 Stein on Personal Injury 

Damages Treatise § 4:57 (3d ed.); and Annotation, 32 A.L.R. 4th 432, Necessity of 

determination or showing of liability for punitive damages before discovery or reception of 

evidence of defendant’s wealth.

Shortly after the parties briefed this matter, Ms. Heller filed a partial summary judgment 

motion addressing Ms. Moorby’s entitlement to punitive damages. The motion is not ripe but 

soon will be. The court then will determine whether there is any triable issue on punitive 

damages. The result will be helpful in ruling on this motion. At this time, the court declines to 

adopt any particular “rule” or perceived best practice regarding threshold showings. 

The court therefore denies the motion to compel at this time. It may be renewed after the 

court rules on Ms. Heller’s summary judgment motion. The scheduling order may be modified at 

that time to extend time for wealth discovery if appropriate.

Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this ____ day of January 2018.

_____________________________

Mary Miles Teachout

Superior Judge
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Theundersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer ofTouchmark Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”), each certify that, to his orher knowledge on the date of this certification:

 

1.      The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended September 30,2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  November 15, 2010 | By:                                           | /s/  Pin Pin Chau     |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
|                          | Pin  Pin Chau                                 |
|                          | President  and Chief Executive Officer        |
|                          | (Principal  Executive Officer)                |
|                          |                                          |
|                          |                                          |                  |
| Date:  November 15, 2010 | By:                                           | /s/  Jorge L. Forment |
|                          | Jorge  L. Forment                             |
|                          | Chief  Financial Officer                      |
|                          | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

----
(LOGO) MIDLAND LOAN SERVICES INC.


November 18, 1999

Attn: Sharon A. Surguy, C.C.T.S.
Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.
11000 Broken Land Parkway
Columbia, MD 21044-3562


DLJ  Commercial   Mortgage   Corporation,   Commercial   Mortgage   Pass-Through
     Certificates Series 1998-CG1


OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

Pursuant to the  requirements  of that certain  Pooling and Servicing  Agreement
governing the referenced Trust (the "PSA"),  it is hereby certified that (i) the
undersigned  has  completed  a  review  of  the  Servicer's  performance  of its
obligations  under the PSA for the preceding  calendar year; (ii) to the best of
the  undersigned's  knowledge  on the  basis of that  review  the  Servicer  has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the PSA throughout such period;  (iii) to
the best of the undersigned's knowledge, the sub-servicer, if any, has fulfilled
its obligations under its sub-servicing agreement in all material respects; and,
(iv) no notice  has been  received  from any  governmental  agency or body which
would  indicate  a  challenge  or  question  as to the  status  of  the  Trust's
qualifications as a REMIC under the Code.

Charles J. Sipple
Senior Vice President

Paula J. Mickelson
Vice President

cc: Please see attached page

210 W.  10th  Street  * Kansas  City,  MO  64105 *  Phone:  816/435-5000  * FAX:
816/435-2326
# Den Europæiske Unions C 178/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0871 |
| --- | --- |
| Den Europæiske Unions
  Tidende | C 178 |
| | |
| Dansk udgave | Meddelelser og oplysninger | 59. årgang18. maj 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0871

Den Europæiske Unions

Tidende

C 178

Dansk udgave

Meddelelser og oplysninger

59. årgang18. maj 2016

---

| Informationsnummer | Indhold | Side |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Berigtigelser |
| 2016/C 178/01 | Berigtigelse til Rådets førstebehandlingsholdning (EU) nr. 1/2016 med henblik på vedtagelsen af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning om Den Europæiske Unions Jernbaneagentur og om ophævelse af forordning (EF) nr. 881/2004 — Vedtaget af Rådet den 10. december 2015( EUT C 56 af 12.2.2016 ) | 1 |

Informationsnummer

Indhold

Side

Berigtigelser

2016/C 178/01

Berigtigelse til Rådets førstebehandlingsholdning (EU) nr. 1/2016 med henblik på vedtagelsen af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning om Den Europæiske Unions Jernbaneagentur og om ophævelse af forordning (EF) nr. 881/2004 — Vedtaget af Rådet den 10. december 2015( EUT C 56 af 12.2.2016 )

( EUT C 56 af 12.2.2016 )

1

---

| DA | |
| --- | --- |

DA

---

Berigtigelser

| 18.5.2016 | DA | Den Europæiske Unions Tidende | C 178/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2016

DA

Den Europæiske Unions Tidende

C 178/1

---

Berigtigelse til Rådets førstebehandlingsholdning (EU) nr. 1/2016 med henblik på vedtagelsen af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning om Den Europæiske Unions Jernbaneagentur og om ophævelse af forordning (EF) nr. 881/2004 — Vedtaget af Rådet den 10. december 2015

(
  Den Europæiske Unions Tidende C 56 af 12. februar 2016
  )

(2016/C 178/01)

Side 39, artikel 65, stk. 10:

I stedet for:

»10.   Efter henstilling fra Rådet, der træffer afgørelse med kvalificeret flertal, giver Europa-Parlamentet senest den 30. april i år n + 2 den administrerende direktør decharge for gennemførelsen af budgettet for regnskabsår n.«

læses:

»10.   Efter henstilling fra Rådet, der træffer afgørelse med kvalificeret flertal, giver Europa-Parlamentet senest den 15. maj i år n + 2 den administrerende direktør decharge for gennemførelsen af budgettet for regnskabsår n.«

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2



                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
        AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


        I, Allen G. Sugerman, Chief Financial Officer of The MIIX Group,
Incorporated (the "Company"), hereby 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 Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2003
(the "Form 10-K"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and (2)
the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: November 15, 2004


/s/ Allen G. Sugerman
------------------------------------
Name:  Allen G. Sugerman
Title: Chief Financial Officer
#### Kuecker, Respondent, vs. Paasch, Appellant.

*December 5, 1951*

February *5, 1952.*

*522For the appellant there were briefs by *Godfrey & Godfrey*of Elkhorn, and oral argument by *Alfred L. Godfrey.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Kenney, Korf & Pfeil*of Elkhorn, and oral argument by *Francis T. Korf.*

Fairchild, J.

The appellant challenges the correctness of the ruling of the trial court in correcting the verdict by changing the answers from “No” to “Yes” with relation to causal negligence resulting from the clerical error of the jury forewoman in recording the verdict. The affirmative answers, having been established to be the answers of the *523jury, beyond question sustain the jury’s verdict as to causal negligence. Where it clearly appears that the case was properly submitted to the jury and that the correction of the verdict as presented was required as a matter of law, the appellant has been deprived of no right by the correction. *Wolfgram v. Schoepke,*123 Wis. 19, 100 N. W. 1054; *Koss v. A. Geo. Schulz Co.*195 Wis. 243, 218 N. W. 175; *Brophy v. Milwaukee E. R. & T. Co.*251 Wis. 558, 30 N. W. (2d) 76.

We find no error in the record which would permit us to interfere with the final judgment as entered. The plaintiff, under the established rule governing options, has accepted the benefit of certainty of recovery rather than submit his case to another jury. We find no occasion for the assertion that he was prejudicially treated by any ruling of the trial court.

After a discussion of the merits of the points involved upon the appeal had been entered into, and when the matter was fully before the court, our attention was called to the fact that a defect in the notice of the appeal existed; and at that time the attorney for the respondent asked to have the appeal dismissed. We, however, in view of sec. 269.51 (1), Stats., continued with the hearing of the case upon the merits. We enter into no discussion over the matter at this time, because we have reached a conclusion on the merits which affirms the judgment; and were a dismissal of the appeal to occur, the results would not be essentially different.

Also upon the oral argument in this court there was a suggestion that the special verdict of the jury in this case was inconsistent because the jury, while finding no causal negligence in respect to plaintiff, did ignore the instruction of the trial court and answered the comparative negligence question, finding that the plaintiff’s negligence was twenty *524per cent and the defendant’s negligence eighty per cent. Plowever, the defendant, in a motion after verdict, set forth the grounds on which he claimed to be entitled to a new trial but did not mention this part of the verdict as a reason for granting a new trial. It is also true that the subject of inconsistent verdict is not mentioned in the defendant’s brief. The matter not having been raised timely we conclude that the question of inconsistent verdict is not before us on this appeal.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
#### Herring and others, Appellants, vs. Holzer and another, Respondents.

For the appellants : *C. R. Jirtle*and *Kaftan, Ruhr & Kaftan,*all of Green Bay.

For the respondents: *Evrard & Evrard*of Green Bay.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                   5
       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      802,215
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               1,995,467
<ALLOWANCES>                                242,335
<INVENTORY>                                 351,622
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            3,525,019
<PP&E>                                      3,631,175
<DEPRECIATION>                              1,216,626
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              7,930,305
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,316,797
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                                    144,770
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,531,262
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                7,930,305
<SALES>                                     7,423,389
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            7,423,389
<CGS>                                       6,644,873
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               2,176,873
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          201,814
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,585,833)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,585,833)
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             (1,420,172)
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                (3,006,005)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                               (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               (.22)
        

</TABLE>