alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Form 10-Q of Security Bank Corporation (the Company) for the period ended
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the Date hereof (the Report), H. Averett Walker, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and James R. McLemore, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 8, 2008                                   
|                                                       
|/s/ H. Averett Walker                                  
|H. Averett Walker President and Chief Executive
Officer



|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 8, 2008                                                       
|                                                                           
|/s/ James R. McLemore, Jr.                                                 
|James R. McLemore, Jr. Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer

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

OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Wlili~ J. Law*on 

~e0rebu-y of sate 

Austin, Texas. 

Dear Slrr 

to ths oorr 

m&ted civil etat\a 

lruah tee is to be qoU. 

OS Vermn~e aanotatsd 

Artids 8756 eonta 

e 80m6 6onflfat 

Artlola 5'164. ITo 

ot exist* beoauao 

Tltls 93 prorldesr 
Eennanblo Uillkaa f. Uw8on, pa@ 2 

We belfwe $2.20 te be the 

Siling the am&mnt inguirod about. 

aorreat~ fw t 6P 

Your6 very tru.LJ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND
AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                    0000925663
<NAME> MIRADOR EQUITY PARTNERS, LTD.
<MULTIPLIER>                    1
<CURRENCY>                      US dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Mar-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 Apr-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 11
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,102
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,246
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,337)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   11
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  87
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (87)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (87)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (87)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.00)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.25

                               AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         This Amendment No. 2, dated as of February 27, 2001, amends the
Employment Agreement, dated as of September 28, 1998, by and between R.H.
Donnelley Corporation (the "Company") and David C. Swanson (the "Executive"), as
amended by Amendment No. 1, dated as of July 27, 2000 (as so amended, the
"Existing Agreement", and as amended hereby, the "Agreement").

         WHEREAS, the Company considers it essential and in the best interests
of its shareholders to foster the continued employment of its senior management
personnel, and the Executive is an important member of the Company's senior
management; and

         WHEREAS, the initial term of the Existing Agreement expires on June 30,
2001, although the Existing Agreement automatically renews for successive
one-year terms, unless either party gives 90 day's written notice prior to the
renewal date;

         WHEREAS, the Company wishes to clarify the ramifications of a decision
by the Company not to renew Executive's employment as of June 30, 2001 or during
any subsequent renewal term; and

         WHEREAS, the Compensation and Benefits Committee of the Board of
Directors has approved the following amendment to the Existing Agreement;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree that the Existing Agreement is hereby
amended as follows:

         1. Paragraph 1 of the Existing Agreement is amended by inserting the
following sentence at the end thereof:

            "Any such non-renewal of this Agreement by the Company shall be
            treated as a termination of Executive's employment without Cause, as
            hereinafter defined."

         2. Except as amended hereby, the Existing Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect in accordance with its terms.

         3. This Amendment No. 2 shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of New York.

         4. This Amendment No. 2 may be signed in counterparts, each of which
shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and
hereto were upon the same instrument.

<PAGE>   2

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Amendment No. 2
as of the day and year first above written.


                                            Executive


                                            /s/ David C. Swanson
                                            --------------------
                                            Signature of David C. Swanson


                                            R.H. DONNELLEY CORPORATION


                                            By:/s/ Frank R. Noonan
                                            ----------------------
                                            Name:  Frank R. Noonan
                                            Title: Chairman & CEO

                                       2
#### Pond v. Okey, Adm’r.

1. Evidence: hearsay. In an action to replevy cattle levied on by an , officer, tbe officer’s testimony as to what the person who had charge of the cattle told him about the ownership of them was mere hearsay, and should have been excluded.

*Appeal from Adams Circuit Court.*

Friday, December 10.

ActioN to replevy two cows, a heifer and a bull, alleged to be the property of the plaintiff, but wrongfully "taken on *245execution as tbe property of one J. EL Eicbey, to satisfy a judgment against him in favor of tbe defendant’s intestate, one A. B. Eisber, deceased. There was a trial to a jury, and verdict and j udgment were rendered for tbe defendant. Tbe plaintiff appeals.

*Towner da Lucas,*for appellant.

*Maxwell da*Dale, for appellee.

AdaMS, Ch. J.

To sustain tbe issue on tbe part of tbe defendant, be introduced as a witness one Pumroy, wbo acted as deputy-sberiff in making tbe levy. It bad already been shown that tbe cattle levied on bad been placed in the possession of one Morain, wbo was feeding them. Tbe witness Pumroy, in the course of bis examination, was asked by tbe defendant a question in these words: “I will ask what steps you took, as officer, to ascertain whose cattle those were out there?” This question was objected to by tbe plaintiff, but tbe objection was overruled, and tbe witness proceeded to state a conversation between himself and Mr. Morain in relation to tbe cattle, and thereupon tbe plaintiff objected specifically to any conversations between tbe witness and Morain, but such objection was overruled. Thereupon tbe witness testified as follows: “'Well, I went there, and told Mr. Morain that I bad an execution against Harvey Eichey, and I wanted to know if be hadn’t a lot of cattle there, and he said there was quite a bunch of cattle that had been brought there by Harvey Eicbey and some other person. He said, ‘They are not all Harvey’s.’ ‘Well,’ says I, ‘do you know which one is Harvey’s, and which belongs to Mother Eicbey, or some of tbe others?’ Well, he thought be did, but be was not very positive, and I told him I did not want to levy on tbe ones I knew to be Mrs. Eichey’s. We went out, and he sent tbe boy with us, and we drove tbe cattle up. There were four or .five we were pretty well convinced were Mrs. Eicbey’s, and tbe others be said bad been put there by Har*246vey, and that he would suppose that they were his, or something to that effect.” The court then made this remark: “What he said about whose they were the court would permit to go to the jury as evidence only to explain what they knew of the matter.”

In admitting this evidence, it appears to us that the court erred. The evidence was introduced as an attempt to prove that the cattle levied on were the property of Richey, against whom the execution ran. The evidence showed what Morain said about Richey’s ownership. It does not appear that Morain had any knowledge of Richey’s ownership; but, if he had such knowledge, it could not properly be shown by proving what the witness heard him say. Morain should have been called. Evidence as to what the witness heard him say was hearsay evidence.

REVERSED.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-Q/A to the Quarterly
    Report on Form 10-Q of SEEC, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period
    ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
    August 22, 2003 (the "Report"), I, Ravindra Koka, president and chief
    executive officer, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.

    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 within 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.


Date:  August 22, 2003                     /s/    RAVINDRA KOKA
                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                  Ravindra Koka
                                 President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Exhibit 32


                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 Sunburst Acquisitions VII, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form  10-KSB  for the period ending  June 30, 2004
(the "Report"),  I, Jay Lutsky,  Principal  Executive  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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.



/s/ Jay Lutsky
-----------------------
Principal Executive Officer
November 8, 2005
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Daniel
Clozza, certify that:

I have
reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Forum National Investments Ltd.;

Based on
my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;

Based on
my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

The
company's other certifying officers and I am responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and we have:

Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this annual report is being prepared;

Designed
such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles.

Evaluated
the effectiveness of the company'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 evaluations; and

Disclosed
in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
company’s internal control over financial reporting: and

The
company's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
company's auditors and the audit committee of the company's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

All
significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of
internal control of financial reporting which are reasonably likely to affect
the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over financial
reporting.

|Date: March
  2, 2012 | /s/
  Daniel Clozza                                  
|--------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|                      | Daniel
  Clozza, Chief Executive Officer and Director

---
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.19    
  


 
 

PROMISSORY NOTE    
  



	Amount $30,000.00	 	August 23, 2001





    For
value received, the undersigned, GeoPetro Resources Company ("Payor"), hereby promises to pay on demand to Stuart J. Doshi ("Holder") the principal sum of Thirty Thousand Dollars
($30,000.00) with interest from August 23, 2001 at a rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, payable upon repayment of the loan. 



	Signed by:
 GeoPetro Resources Company	 	 
	

 J. Chris Steinhauser

Chief Financial Officer	
 	

 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.19


PROMISSORY NOTE
---

EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF EDWARD M. MANDEL, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) / 15(d)-14(a) UNDER
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I, Edward M. Mandel, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of NeXplore Corporation;

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(s) 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

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 report based on such evaluation; and

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 most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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(s) 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 control over financial reporting.

November 29, 2007

| | /s/   EDWARD M. MANDEL 
| | -----------------------
| | Edward M. Mandel       
| | Chief Executive Officer
#### State ex rel. Stecher, Plaintiff, vs. Baird, Municipal Judge, Defendant.

*October 7*

November *4, 1941.*

*Joseph Wolf*of Milwaukee, for the plaintiff.

*Henry J. Lockney*and *D. B. Malone,*both of Waukesha, for the defendant.

Wickbem, J.

This case was argued and submitted with the case of *State ex rel. Beck v. Baird, ante,*p. 624, 300 N. W. 752, and is ruled by the decision therein.

*By the Court.*— Let a writ of prohibition issue as prayed for in the petition.
#### JOHN E. DYCHE *vs.*A. J. PATTON.

Whether a Court of Equity will interfere in a ease at law, where the verdict was obtained by the testimony of a witness, which was known to be false by the party using it, and which the opposite party had no means of contradicting at the trial, or in time to support a rule for a new trial, and with the further ground offered, that the false witness has been prosecuted for perjury, or has absconded so as not to be answerable to the process of the law: *Query ?*

When the answer to a bill of injunction is responsive to its allegations and not evasive, and positively denies the truth of the facts set forth in the bill, the injunction must be dissolved.

Cases transmitted from the Court of Equity of Cherokee County, at the Fall Term, 1851.

*J. W. Woodfin*for the plaintiff.

*Gaither*and *J. Baxter*for the defendant.

*296Pearson J.

It is attempted by the bill to raise this question : Will a Court of Equity interfere and require the parties to set aside a judgment and verdict at law, and try the matter *de novo,*upon the allegation that the verdict was obtained by the testimony of a witness, *which was known to be false by the party using it,*and which the opposite part3r had no means of contradicting at the trial, or in time to support a rule for a new trial; without *an allegation,*that the false witness has been presented for perjury or has absconded so as not to be answerable to the process of the law ?

The question is an interesting one, but we do not feel at liberty to decide it, because it is not presented by the case in the stage in which we are now considering it. The answer, without evasion,-responds to the allegation by a positive and flat denial. Consequently the plaintiff has nothing to stand on, and cannot support the injunction, which he obtained at the filing of h-is bill, for, on the motion to dissolve upon the bill and answer, the answer, so far as it is responsive to the bill, is taken to be true.

The allegation of the discovery of *new matter*after the trial and after the term, when it was too late to move for a new trial, is also positively denied in the answer.

In this case the denial of the answer is accompanied with an exhibit and also a narration of facts, alt tending to disprove the allegations of the bill.

There is no error — this opinion will be certified.

Per Curiam. Ordered accordingly.