alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Martin and others, Respondents, vs. Morris, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Walsh & Morris*and *William F. Morris,*all of Washburn.

For the respondents: *Larrabee & Larrabee*of Chippewa Falls.

*By the Court.*

Order affirmed.
Exhibit 10.15

ADDENDUM TO THE

CAPTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY
MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

CEDAR MANAGEMENT LIMITED (CEDAR)

USA RISK GROUP (BERMUDA),
LTD. (USABDA)

(and their affiliated companies) (hereafter collectively MANAGER)

AND

AMERINST INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. (COMPANY)

EFFECTIVE: January 1, 2010

The original agreement between COMPANY and MANAGER is hereby renewed for one year beginning January 1, 2010 and ending December, 31, 2010.

The Management Agreement Addendum is amended to read as follows:

Management Agreement Addendum



| | 1) | It is hereby agreed that, the Company will compensate MANAGER at a rate of $335,000 per annum beginning 1/1/10 and ending 12/31/10, which shall be inclusive of all work
by MANAGER on runoff business written under the CNA, CAMICO and PDIC treaties, as well as new business assumed from Crum & Forster.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | Cause the above fee to be paid in quarterly installments in advance at the beginning of each calendar quarter.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3) | Reimburse MANAGER for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred during the management of the COMPANY including; courier and express mail service; long distance
telephone calls; travel and meeting expenses incurred at the request of the COMPANY; costs of COMPANY stationery; filing fees; and similar expenses.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMPANY agrees that special projects will be invoiced separately at agreed upon fees or rates.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Addendum this 12th day of December, 2009.



By:

/s/ MICHAEL LARKINCedar Management Limited (itself and on behalf of its affiliated companies)By:

/s/ STUART H. GRAYSTONUSA Risk Group (Bermuda), Ltd. (itself and on behalf of its affiliated companies)By:

/s/ IRVIN F. DIAMONDAmerInst Insurance Company, Ltd.
EPA and ASTSWMO Meeting April 4 , 2013 Attendees EPA – Mark Barolo, Linda Gerber, Liz McDermott, Paul Miller, Andrea Barbery ASTSWMO – Charles Reyes States NY – Russ Brauksieck NH – Michael Juranty DE – Becky Key ser and J ill Hall TN – Lamar Bradley UT – Theron Blatter CO – Mahesh Alburquerque MN – Jeff Brandon and Mike Ry nders TX – Doug R OK – Terri Roberts MO – Ken Koons OR – Mitch Scheel CA – Laura Fisher EPA and states met to discuss a number of issues from the proposed revisions to the UST regulation s. The discussion included the definitions, compatibility, and closure.
Page 1 of 9
 

 

 

Page 2 of 9
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 3 of 9
Page 4 of 9
 

Page 5 of 9
Page 6 of 9
Page 7 of 9
Page 8 of 9
Page 9 of 9
#### Burdick, Respondent, vs. Kriplean Brothers and others, Appellants.

For the appellants: *Benton,*Bosser, *Becker & Parnell*of Appleton.

For the respondent: *Clifford C. Mullarkey*of Clintonville.

*By the Court.*

Order affirmed.
AVAQMD Rule 1134 

B-3

Final Staff Report, 03/17/10
#### T. W. TAYLOR and wife v. HENRY POPE.

FROM CUMBERLAND.

The point presented in this appeal is -the same as that decided in *Godwin v. Monds, ante,*354, and it was determined in the same way.

Error.
STATE OF TE NNESSEE

DEPARTMENT O F ENVI RONM ENT AND CONSERVATION

WATER SUPPL Y

9th Floor, 4 01 C hurch Street

Nashville, Tennessee 37243-154 9



### WELL RE WORK REP O RT

Nam e an d Address o f Facility Nam e and Ad d r ess of O w n er/ O pe rat o r

S t a t e C o un t y Perm i t Nu m b e r

WE LL ACT I VI T Y TYPE OF PERM I T LOCAT I ON

___ Br ine Disposal

___ I ndividual Lati tude

___ E nhanced Recover y

___ Ar ea

___ Hy dr ocar bon Stor age

___ Nu m b er of Wells

Longitude

Lease N a m e Well u m b e r

Total Depth Bef o re Rework Date Rework Commenced

Total Depth After Rework Date R e work Co m p leted

Certifica t i o n

I cert i f y un de r t h e penal t y of l a w t h at I ha ve exam i n ed and am fa m i l i ar with th e in fo rmatio n su b m it ted in th is do cu m e n t an d all

at t achm e nt s and t h at

, based o n m y i nqui ry o f t h ose i n di vi d u al s i m m e di at el y resp on si bl e fo r obt ai ni n g t h e i n f o rm at i on, I bel i e ve th at

th e inform atio n is tru e , accurate, an d co m p lete. I am aware th at th ere are si gn ifican t p e n a lties for su b m ittin g false in fo rm at ion

, in clu d i n g th e po ssib ility o f fine or im p r iso n m en t.

Nam e and Offi ci al Tit l e (ple as e t y pe or p r int) Signature Date Sign ed

C N R D A 2 4 7 4
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 76
          - [MB Docket No.23-203; Report No. 3220; FR ID 258224]

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

# ACTION:

Petition for Reconsideration.

# SUMMARY:

Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) has been filed in the Commission's proceeding by Gerard Lavery Lederer on behalf of Texas Coalition of Cities for Utility Issues.

# DATES:

Oppositions to the Petition must be filed on or before November 18, 2024. Replies to oppositions to the Petition must be filed on or before November 12, 2024.

# ADDRESSES:

Federal Communications Commission, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        For additional information on this proceeding, contact Joseph Price, Media Bureau, (202) 418-1423 or                         *joseph.price@fcc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This is a summary of the Commission's document, Report No. 3220, released October 25, 2024. The full text of the Petition can be accessed online via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System at:                     *http://apps.fcc.gov/​ecfs/​.*                     The Commission will not send a Congressional Review Act (CRA) submission to Congress or the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being adopted by the Commission.                

*Subject:*                     Part 76—Multichannel Video And Cable Television Service.                

*Number of Petitions Filed:*                     1.                

Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene Dortch,

Secretary, Office of the Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2024-25497 Filed 10-31-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
<PAGE>



                                                                      EXHIBIT 15



LETTER RE: UNAUDITED INTERIM FINANCIAL INFORMATION


Cintech Solutions, Inc.:

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited condensed interim
financial information of Cintech Solutions, Inc. for the periods ended September
30, 2001 and 2000, as indicated in our report dated October 16, 2001; because we
did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2001, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-95366 and 333-94661
in Form S-8.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

"/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP"

Cincinnati, Ohio
November 9, 2001
#### M. J. SIMONTON v. R. SIMONTON, Executrix.

*Practice*— New *Trial.*

Where the judge who presided at a trial, goes out of office without making' up a case of appeal, and the appellant is in no default, a new trial will he awarded.

*{Adams*v. Beeves, 74 íT. C., 106 ; *Mason*v. Osgood, 72 N. C., 120; *Isler*v. Haddock, *ibid,*119, cited and approved.)

Civil Action tried at fall term, 1877, of Iredell superior court, before Cloud, *J.*

*Mr. R. F.*Armfield, for plaintiff.

*Messrs. M. L. McCorkle*and *G. N. Folk,*for defendant.

Smith, C. J.

The transcript of the record in this appeal was filed, at January term, 1878, containing no concise statement of the case as prescribed in the Code, § 801. It appears by affidavit that the counsel of the parties were unable to agree upon a case and sent their respective statements to the judge, who presided at the trial, to settle it. This has not been done as appears from the return to the writ of certiorari issued by order of the court, and the judge has gone out of office. If this omission were the fault of the appellant, his appeal would be dismissed. *Adams*v. *Reeves,*74 N. C., 106. But as it is not, in accordance with the practice in this court a new trial must be awarded. *Mason*v. *8
      *Osgood,*72 N. C., 120; *Isler*v. *Haddock, ibid,*119. And it is so ordered.

Pee, Curiam. Order accordingly
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 Quarterly Report of ARKONA, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly  period ended  September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Alan Rudd,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to the best of 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.


/s/ Alan Rudd
-------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
November 15, 2004
EX-13.1 4 eh1300930_ex1301.htm EXHIBIT 13.1

**EXHIBIT 13.1**

 

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer**

**Pursuant to**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As Enacted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002**

 

 

Agave Silver Corp. (the “Company”) is filingwith the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, its annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March31, 2014 (the “Report”).

 

I, Ronald M. Lang, President and Chief Executive Officerof the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(i)  the Report fully complies with the requirementsof section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)  the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 

 

 

February 12, 2015
Exhibit 13.2




Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


As Enacted Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002






Cream Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, its annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 (the “Report”).




I, Angela Yap, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:




(i)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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






/s/ Angela Yap


Angela Yap


Chief Financial Officer






July 31, 2012
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                      1,786,927
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                  14,313
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1,801,240 
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,801,240
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         120,234
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,681,006
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                1,801,240
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              321,488
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              256,064
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                65,424
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            65,424
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                   65,424
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .007
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .007
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

I, Fran Ross, certify that:

 

1.  Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Boston Restaurant Associates, Inc.;

 

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.  The registrant’s other certifying officersand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)  Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)) [omitted]

 

(c)  Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report; based on suchevaluation and

 

(d)  Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.  The registrant’s other certifying officersand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)  All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financialinformation; 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: March 7, 2005 | /s/ Fran Ross                             |   |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------|
|                |  Fran  Ross, Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 519 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 519

 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to make corrections to a map 
           relating to the Coastal Barrier Resources System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 3, 1999

   Mr. Biden introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to make corrections to a map 
           relating to the Coastal Barrier Resources System.

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

SECTION 1. CORRECTIONS TO MAP.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall make such corrections 
to the map described in subsection (b) as are necessary to move on that 
map the boundary of the otherwise protected area (as defined in section 
12 of the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 3503 note; 
Public Law 101-591)) to the Cape Henlopen State Park boundary to the 
extent necessary--
            (1) to exclude from the otherwise protected area the 
        adjacent property leased, as of the date of enactment of this 
        Act, by the Barcroft Company and Cape Shores Associates (which 
        are privately held corporations under the law of the State of 
        Delaware); and
            (2) to include in the otherwise protected area the 
        northwestern corner of Cape Henlopen State Park seaward of the 
        Lewes and Rehoboth Canal.
    (b) Map Described.--The map described in this subsection is the map 
that is included in a set of maps entitled ``Coastal Barrier Resources 
System'', dated October 24, 1990, as revised October 15, 1992, and that 
relates to the unit of the Coastal Barrier Resources System entitled 
``Cape Henlopen Unit DE-03P''.
                                 <all>
```
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

________________ No. 08-1718

________________ United States of America, Plaintiff – Appellee,

v. Billy Cole, Defendant – Appellant. * * * * * * * * * Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. [UNPUBLISHED]

________________ Submitted: April 22, 2008 Filed: May 7, 2008

________________ Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

________________ PER CURIAM. Billy Cole appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), based on amendments to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manua l (U.S.S.G.) which reduced certain base offense levels in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c) depending on the quantity of cocaine base (crack) involved. The district court denied Cole's moti on without any explanation. Because we are unable to review its order without know ing its reasons, we remand to the district-2- court for the entry of a certified order with in 45 days setting forth the reasons why the motion for reduction was denied. In order to expedite the matter, our panel will retain jurisdiction over this appeal.

______________________________
#### The State of Iowa, Appellee, v. Lou Brissou, Appellant.

Nuisance: judgment : appeal.

*Appeal from Polk District Court.*— Hon. W. F. Conrad, Judge.

Wednesday, October 29, 1890.

Robinson, J.

The defendant, Lou Brissou, was convicted of the crime of nuisance, and from the judgment of the district court requiring him to pay a fine of five hundred dollars and costs, and to be imprisoned in default of payment, he appeals. The cause is submitted in this court on a tran ipt of the indictment, record of judgment, and notice of appeal. We find no error in the record. Affirmed.