alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         155,600
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          13,883
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               174,422
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     59,542
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         654,231
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           635,412
<LOANS>                                      4,361,493
<ALLOWANCE>                                     52,161
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,498,700
<DEPOSITS>                                   3,729,780
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,137,921
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            112,209
<LONG-TERM>                                    797,596
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           326
<OTHER-SE>                                     630,868
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               6,498,700
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                369,841
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               51,815
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               421,656
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             142,427
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             251,172
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          170,484
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   28,311
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              10,058
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                179,688
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 54,017
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      54,017
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    28,964
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.36
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.23
<LOANS-NON>                                     16,316
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 1,009
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                45,405
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   31,245
<RECOVERIES>                                     4,090
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               52,161
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            52,161
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2





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





I, R. Steven Caldwell, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Willamette Valley Vineyards Inc. on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc.





Date: March 31, 2010By:
/s/ R. Steven CaldwellName:
R. Steven CaldwellTitle:
Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. and will be retained by Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K 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 Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. specifically incorporates it by reference.
Ricky W. ARNOLD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 80373

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: April 24, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 29, 2018 Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied August 21, 2018

S. Kate Webber, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.

Shaun Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before Division Three: Victor C. Howard, Presiding Judge, Cynthia L. Martin, Judge and Gary D. Witt, Judge

**ORDER**

Per curiam:

*699Ricky W. Arnold appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Arnold asserts that he received ineffective assistance when: (1) trial counsel failed to present a defense and to request a jury instruction on entrapment; and (2) trial counsel failed to move to dismiss the charge of attempted enticement of a child based on the government's outrageous conduct. Arnold argues that an evidentiary hearing on his Rule 29.15 motion was required because he alleged facts which are not refuted by the record that, if true, would warrant post-conviction relief. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
<page> EXHIBIT 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Morgan Stanley Charter
Campbell L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Lee
Horwitz, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management
Corporation, the general partner of the Partnership, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
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 Partnership.









By:  /s/Lee Horwitz

Name:	   Lee Horwitz
Title:  Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management Corporation,
        the general partner of the Partnership

Date:	   November 13, 2007



? 6 ?


? 6 ?


MORGAN STANLEY CHARTER CAMPBELL L.P.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED)





? 84 ?

- 37 -

- 85 -
Exhibit 21

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                              December 31, 2004

                              CNB BANCORP, INC.
                      10-24 N. Main Street, P.O. Box 873
                         Gloversville, New York 12078
                      ----------------------------------
                                      |
                                      |
                                      |
                                      |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY               HATHAWAY AGENCY, INC.
 10-24 N. Main Street, P.O. Box 873                   7 Church Street
    Gloversville, New York 12078                Gloversville, New York 12078
-------------------------------------           ----------------------------
             (100% Owned)                              (100% Owned)
                  |
                  |
                  |
                  |
------------------------------------
           CNB REIT CORP.
 10-24 N. Main Street, P.O. Box 873
    Gloversville, New York 12078
------------------------------------
            (100% Owned)
exv10w23






Exhibit 10.23




AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

BETWEEN HARLAND CLARKE HOLDINGS CORP.

AND PETER A. FERA, JR.




     WHEREAS, Harland Clarke Holdings Corp., a Delaware corporation (the ‘‘Company’’), and Peter A.
Fera, Jr. (the ‘‘Executive’’) entered into an employment agreement (as amended, the “Employment
Agreement”) dated as of February 13, 2008;



     WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive wish to modify the term of employment set forth in the
Employment Agreement;



     NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the Company and the Executive hereby agree to amend the Employment Agreement,
effective as of February 2, 2010, as set forth below:




	 	1.	 	Section 2.1 is hereby modified by deleting the date of December 31, 2010 and
inserting in its place the date December 31, 2013.
	 
	 	2.	 	All other terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement shall otherwise
remain in place, except as expressly amended herein.





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment to the Employment Agreement
effective as of February 2, 2010.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	HARLAND CLARKE HOLDINGS CORP.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Charles Dawson
 	 
	 	 	Name:  	Charles Dawson 	 
	 	 	Title:  	President & CEO 	 
	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ Peter A. Fera, Jr.
 	 
	 	 	Peter A. Fera, Jr. 	 
	 	 	 
	 




Page 1 of 1
##### 



Exhibit 10 (b6-1) AMENDMENT TO THE
CAPITOL BANCORP LTD.
EMPLOYEE SAVINGS AND STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN
AMENDMENT NUMBER 18 The Capitol Bancorp Ltd. Employee Savings and Stock Ownership Plan is hereby
amended effective January 27, 2004 adding the following participating employer at the end of the list contained: Name of
    
    Type of
    
    State of
    
    Date ofEmployer
    
    Entity
    
    Organization
    
    ParticipationBank of
    
    Bank
    
    California
    
    1/1/2004Escondido
 CAPITOL BANCORP LIMITEDDated: January 27, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Joseph D. ReidJoseph D. ReidChairman and CEOBANK OF ESCONDIDODated: January 27, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Michael R. PetersMichael R. PetersPresident




---



##### 



Exhibit 10 (b6-2) AMENDMENT TO THE
CAPITOL BANCORP LTD.
EMPLOYEE SAVINGS AND STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN
AMENDMENT NUMBER 19 The Capitol Bancorp Ltd. Employee Savings and Stock Ownership Plan is hereby amended effective
January 26, 2004 adding the following participating employer at the end of the list contained: Name of
    
    Type of
    
    State of
    
    Date ofEmployer
    
    Entity
    
    Organization
    
    ParticipationFirst California
    
    Bank Holding
    
    California
    
    7/1/2003Southern Bancorp
    
    Company
 CAPITOL BANCORP LIMITEDDated: January 26, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Joseph D. ReidJoseph D. ReidChairman and CEOFIRST CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN BANCORPDated: January 26, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Scott R. AndrewsScott R. AndrewsPresident




---



##### 



Exhibit 10 (b6-3) AMENDMENT TO THE
CAPITOL BANCORP LTD.
EMPLOYEE SAVINGS AND STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN
AMENDMENT NUMBER 20 The Capitol Bancorp Ltd. Employee Savings and Stock Ownership Plan is hereby amended effective
July 28, 2004 adding the following participating employer at the end of the list contained: Name of
    
    Type of
    
    State of
    
    Date ofEmployer
    
    Entity
    
    Organization
    
    ParticipationFirst Carolina
    
    Bank
    
    North Carolina
    
    7/1/2004State Bank
 CAPITOL BANCORP LIMITEDDated: July 28, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Joseph D. ReidJoseph D. ReidChairman and CEOFIRST CAROLINA STATE BANKDated: July 28, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ David A. ParkerDavid A. ParkerPresident
CHARLESTON.

#### State *v.*Jesse Robey

(No. 6094)

Submitted November 20, 1928.

Decided November 27, 1928.

*428U. *A. Knapp,*for plaintiff in error.

*Howard B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *W. Elliott Nefflen,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Litz, Judge:

The defendant was indicted jointly with Lawrence Brannon for robbing Harry Stoltz of $1,007.75. Upon a separate trial the defendant was found guilty and sentenced to a term in the penitentiary.

The evidence upon which the state relies for a conviction is as follows: The defendant, Brannon, Stoltz and Tom Bell were engaged in a drinking bout late one afternoon in a house in Fairmont; when Stoltz bad been seen to put some money in bis right trousers pocket, the defendant extended bis band to the pocket; whereupon Tom Bell struck Robey. Brannon as well as defendant resented the blow and Bell left the house hurriedly and was seen no more. Stoltz then took bis departure. leaving defendant and Brannon within the house. After Stoltz was several hundred feet from the house, Bran-non suddenly overtook hinj and held and robbed him of his money. Stoltz observed defendant a few feet to one side while Brannon was holding him. After Brannon bad secured the money, be said, “Let’s knock him over the hill”, to which the defendant replied, “Let him go borne”.

Both Brannon and defendant admit drinking with Stoltz and Bell, but deny the robbery as well as any motion by defendant towards Stoltz’ pocket. The evidence for the state is sufficient to sustain the verdict During the trial, however, the state, as a part of its evidence in chief and over the objection of defendant, was permitted to introduce testimony that Brannon was overheard telling bis wife to look in back of a certain shanty and she would find the money bidden there; and that an officer who later went to the place described by Brannon found no money but did observe the track of a woman’s shoe and some broken boards recently disturbed. Brannon’s alleged remark to bis wife was made several days after the alleged robbery and the defendant was not present. It is settled law that a statement, not a part of the *res gestae,*made by an accomplice after the completion of the crime in *429the absence of the accused, cannot be used in evidence against the latter. *State*v. *Hively,*103 W. Va. *237; State*v. *Spurr,*100 W. Va. 121. The opinion in the latter case carefully reviews the authorities.

We find no other prejudicial error, but the admission of the alleged remark of Brannon to his wife was highly prejudicial and calls for a reversal of the ease.

*Judgment reversed; verdict set aside; new trial awarded.*
CHARLESTON.

#### T. N. Read *v.*Della Wiseman

(No. 6141)

Submitted October 23, 1928.

Decided October 30, 1928.

*W. M. LaFon*and *W. F. Boggess,*for plaintiff in error.

*Thomas Leigh Read,*for defendant in error.

Litz, Judge:

The plaintiff, T. N. Read, seeks to recover from the defendant, Della Wiseman, the sum of $4,483.10, for money paid *288by him as accommodation indorser on a negotiable note for $6,240.00, dated July 30, 1921, (and twice renewed), purporting to have been signed by M. T. Wiseman and Della Wiseman, his wife, as makers, and discounted at the National Bank of Summers, Hinton, W. Va. By deed bearing even date therewith, M. T. Wiseman and Della Wiseman, his wife, conveyed to C. H. Thompson, trustee, a tract of 38 acres of land in Greenbrier county, on which the grantors resided, to-secure the payment of said note (and any renewal thereof), the proceeds of which were used to discharge encumbrances on said land. The deed of trust recites that the note was signed by M. T. Wiseman and Della Wiseman, as makers. M. T. Wiseman having been adjudged a bankrupt, the property was-sold under the deed of trust, April 11, 1925, for $2,225.00; and on June 20, 1925, the plaintiff paid the bank the remainder of its claim. This action was instituted, after the death of M. T. Wiseman, in 1926. The defense, offered under the plea of *non est*factum, is that the defendant did not sign, nor authorize her signature to, the original or renewal notes. The plaintiff testified that he indorsed the note as an accommodation for the Wisemans, believing the recital in the deed of trust, that the note had been executed by both of them, to be true. The court instructed the jury, notwithstanding the reliance of the plaintiff upon the truth of said recital, that they should find for the defendant unless they believed from the evidence that she did, in fact, sign the original note. This instruction (binding in effect) is erroneous because it ignores the question of estoppel presented by the deed. The verdict, returned in favor of the defendant, was set aside on motion of the plaintiff. Of this ruling the defendant complains. A binding instruction which ignores material evidence or pertinent issues supported by substantial evidence is erroneous, and constitutes ground for setting aside the verdict by the trial-court or reversal on appeal. *Johnson*v. *Bank,*60 W. Va. 320; *Diddle*v. *Continental Casualty Company,*65 W. Va. 170; *Delmar Oil Company*v. *Bartlett,*62 W. Va. 700; *Trippett*v. *Monongahela West Penn Public Service Company,*100 W. Va. 319.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
Exhibit 32.1



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Daniel P. Beharry, Chief Executive Officer of Mera Pharmaceuticals, certify
that (1) Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 3 (a) or 15 (d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2003 fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of Mera
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.







                                            /S/   DANIEL P. BEHARRY
                                            -----------------------
                                            Daniel P. Beharry
                                            Chief Executive Officer

                                            February 13, 2004




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Mera
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
IN RE the ADOPTION OF: A.M.K.;

M.A.G. and S.L.G., Respondents, v. B.E.K., Appellant.

WD 80802

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Filed: May 29, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 3, 2018 Application for Transfer Denied September 25, 2018

Marsha I. Stiles, Springfield, for appellant.

James O. Kjar, Warsaw, Audara L. Charlton Lutjen, Clinton, for respondent.

Before Division Two: Karen King Mitchell, P.J., and Alok Ahuja and Edward R. Ardini, JJ.

**ORDER**

PER CURIAM:

B.E.K., the natural father of A.M.K., appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Benton County granting the petition for adoption of A.M.K. by her maternal grandfather M.A.G. and his wife S.L.G. The adoption was granted without B.E.K.'s consent, based on the circuit court's finding *463that B.E.K. had willfully neglected A.M.K. for the six months preceding the filing of the adoption petition. *See* § 453.040(7), RSMo. On appeal, B.E.K. argues that the circuit court's finding of neglect is against the weight of the evidence, that the circuit court abused its discretion in finding that adoption was in A.M.K.'s best interest, and that he is entitled to a new trial because he received ineffective assistance from his court-appointed counsel. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided the parties with an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b)
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 11
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 11
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 11
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 11
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 11
 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 11
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 11
 

 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 11
 

 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 11
 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 11
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 11
#### Raymond Mullens v. State Compensation Commissioner

(No. 6933)

Submitted February 18, 1931.

Decided February 24, 1931.

*176
      *W. L. Taylor,*for appellant.

*II. B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *R. Dennis Steed,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Hatcher, Judge:

Petitioner’s right hand and wrist were injured on August 16, 1929, while in the employ of a subscriber to the workmen’s compensation fund, and he received temporary compensation. He was examined on March 4, 1930, by the medical examiner of the compensation department. The written report of the examiner makes no estimate of the disability, but describes the injury as follows: a fracture of the carpal bones of the wrist, which had healed with some distortion of the wrist joint; an injury to the little finger and a scar on the palmer surface, which prevented full extension of fingers, and which diminished the grip of the hand. A recommendation, evidently oral, must have been made by the examiner, for a letter of the department to petitioner’s employer, dated March 10th, states that the examiner had recommended a permanent disability award of 5%. On March 21st, this award was made. On March 29th, petitioner objected to the per cent of the award, and was informed on April 3rd, substantially, that the objection would not be considered, as the commissioner was of opinion that it did not go to the basis of the right to compensation. On June 23rd, petitioner requested a further hearing, and presented affidavits of three reputable physicians describing the condition of his hand, and stating that in their opinions he was at least 15% permanently disabled. -The commissioner refused to reopen the case, and this appeal was allowed.

The affidavits of the three physicians differ materially from the report of the department’s medical examiner in that they specify fractures of fingers, show a greater injury to the *177palm, and indicate a greater distortion of the wrist joint and less gripping power. The affidavits present an aggravated condition of the injury, not taken into account by the commissioner in fixing the per cent of disability. *Murasky*v. *Commissioner,*109 W. Va. 218, 153 S. E. 509. His jurisdiction of the ease had not ended. He should therefore have reopened the case, and it will be re-committed to him for that purpose. *Bonner*v. *Commissioner,*recently decided by this Court.

*Recommitted.*
<Page>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration
statements of our report dated March 10, 2006 (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to a change
in method of accounting for certain nontraditional long-duration contracts and
separate accounts in 2004), relating to the financial statements and financial
statement schedules of Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York, appearing in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York
for the year ended December 31, 2005.

   FORM S-3 REGISTRATION STATEMENT NOS.    FORM N-4 REGISTRATION STATEMENT NOS.
   ------------------------------------    ------------------------------------
               333-58512                                  033-65381
               333-100029                                 333-68344
                                                          333-81970
                                                          333-94785

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Chicago, Illinois
March 13, 2006