alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Sailsman Graphics Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Verizon Yellow Pages Company et al., Respondents.

[773 NYS2d 559]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered April 25, 2003, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In this class action to recover overcharges, the terms of the agreements were not ambiguous. Reasonably interpreted *(see Uribe v Merchants Bank of N.Y.,*91 NY2d 336, 341 [1998]), those terms sustain defendants’ position that the issue period of the directories could be extended for up to six months, either before or after the date of publication. Furthermore, the claim for unjust enrichment is not supportable where the contract language governs the dispute *(Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R.R. Co.,*70 NY2d 382 [1987]). Finally, there is nothing inequitable about defendants retaining advertising fees resulting from an agreement that plaintiffs had freely entered into. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.
| 1. | Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Theinformation contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PR Complete Holdings. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| PR COMPLETE HOLDINGS, INC. |
|----------------------------|
|                       |     |
| By:                   |  /s/ Chrissy Albice |
|                  | Chrissy Albice, |
|                       | President, CEO, CFO, Principal Accounting Officer,Secretary, Treasurer and Director |
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.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,485]

                    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on March 4,                           ( print page 12385)                        2009 in response to a petition filed by the United Steelworkers of America, Local 155, on behalf of workers of Sapa HE Tubing, Louisville, Kentucky.                

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Therefore, the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of March 2009.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-6315 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 16.1





|KPMG Ltda. Bogotá D.C. -Colombia  Calle 90 No. 19C – 74 | Teléfono	+57 (1) 6188000 Fax:	+57 (1) 2185490 Internet	www.kpmg.com.co
|------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------

|
|





April 29, 2013



Securities and Exchange Commission

100F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549-7561



File
Number:001-34175





Ladies and Gentlemen:



We were previously principal accountants for Ecopetrol S.A.
and, pursuant to our report included in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Ecopetrol
S.A. datedApril 29, 2013, we audited the consolidated financial statements of Ecopetrol S.A. as of and for the
years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2012. On March 21, 2013, we were notified that Ecopetrol S.A. engaged PricewaterhouseCoopers Limitada as its principal accountant
for the year ending December 31, 2013 and that the auditor-client relationship with KPMG will cease upon completion of the
audit and filing of the Annual Report on Form 20-F including Ecopetrol S.A.’s consolidated financial statements as of and
for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2012, and the issuance of our reports thereon. We have read Item 16F of Form 20-F of Ecopetrol S.A. and are agreement with the
statements contained in paragraphs one, two and three made concerning our firm.







Very truly yours,







/s/ KPMG Ltda
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 50203 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

NOE NIETO, SR.

,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:17

- CR

- 214

- 1

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Noe Nieto, Sr., has moved for leave

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386
U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Nieto h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 18, 2019
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-50203 Document: 00514838850 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/18/2019No. 18

- 50203

2 Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANT ED, counsel is
excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 18-50203 Document: 00514838850 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/18/2019
Byron D. PIERCE, Appellant, v. Baniki R. PIERCE, Respondent.

WD 82079

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: July 16, 2019

Christopher Benjamin, Butler, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Ladarron Williams, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division Two: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Thomas H. Newton, and Mark D. Pfeiffer, Judges

**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

Mr. Byron D. Pierce appeals a Cass County Circuit Court judgment denying his motion for a contempt citation arising out of a marital dissolution. For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
**Exhibit 31.1**
**Certification**
I, Gary McGaha, President and C.E.O., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of SouthernCommunity Bancshares, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe small business issuer and have:
a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to thesmall business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared; b. [Intentionally omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and34-47986] c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report basedon such evaluation; and d. Disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small businessissuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: November 12, 2004      /s/ Gary McGaha  Gary McGaha, President and Chief Executive Officer
Michael Anthony PLANES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-2307

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
ex10_61.htm




Exhibit 10.61



























February 4, 2010












Ms. Bridget Rainero


CapitalSource Finance LLC


4445 Willard Avenue, 12th Floor


Chevy Chase, MD 20815







Re:  Extension Request of the $50MM Inventory Line












Dear Bridget:







Under the first amendment to the Amended and Restated Inventory Loan and Security Agreement dated June 4, 2008, the Borrower, Silverleaf Resorts, Inc., has the right to request (i) an extension of the commitment period from April 30, 2010 to April 30, 2011, and (ii) an extension of the maturity date from April 30, 2012 to April 30, 2013.  The Borrower is hereby exercising the option under Section 2.9 to request (i) an extension of the commitment period to April 30, 2011, and (ii) an extension of the maturity date to April 30, 2013, and is wiring the sum of $125,000 for the extension fee.  For any further amendments or agreements to be executed, please forward to my attention.







As always, we appreciate the long-term relationship between our companies, and please let me know if you shall need anything further.












Sincerely,












/s/ HARRY J. WHITE, JR.


Harry J. White, Jr., CFO


Silverleaf Resorts, Inc.












1221 River Bend Drive · Suite 120 · Dallas, Texas, 75247 · 214-631-1166 · Fax 214-631-4981
RODERICK FARLIN

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 5952

Opinion filed April 1, 2015.

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel

-- Original

Jurisdiction

.

Roderick Farlin, pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(d)(5) and (6)(C).

WOLF, BENTON, and RAY, JJ., CONCUR.
Beth ARMSTRONG, Respondent, v. Douglas READY, Appellant.

WD 81753

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: March 12, 2019 Application for Transfer Denied June 25, 2019

Douglas Ready, Fulton, MO, Appellant Acting Pro Se.

Kristen Dickinson, Columbia, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division One: Lisa White Hardwick, P.J., Edward R. Ardini, and Thomas N. Chapman, JJ.

**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

*232Appellant Douglas Ready appeals from the entry of a full order of protection against him by the Circuit Court of Callaway County. In his first point on appeal, Ready argues that the trial judge should have *sua sponte* recused from hearing the matter. In his second point on appeal, Ready argues that the court misapplied the law regarding the award of attorney's fees. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
**Exhibit 31.2**Certification of Principal Financial OfficerI, Lawrence L. Spanley, Jr., certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bakers Footwear Group, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) [reserved](c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        June 12, 2006 /s/ Lawrence L. Spanley, Jr.   Lawrence L. Spanley, Jr.   Chief Financial Officer
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 Stock Market Solutions, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending September 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Richard Smitten, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Richard Smitten
------------------------
     Richard Smitten
     President, CEO, Principal Financial Officer and Principal
     Accounting Officer

January 6, 2005
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Amerilithium Corp. (the "registrant"),
hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the registrant's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the registrant.

                                 /s/Henry Bush
                                 ----------------------
                                 Henry Bush
                                 Chief Financial Officer
April 14, 2010
J

~~~ ED STq T

~ S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY o e WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 7-

~ {f
~ i z

0

~ yr 'QC PROj

~ G

~ \


### JUL 2 1 2C

~ 

### i OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION 

### J. R. Stroble Director, National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 

### Carlsbad, NM 88221 Dear Mr. Stroble: We received your letter dated July 20, 2011, requesting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) concurrence on the draft recertification memo the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) plans to issue to the Central Characterization Project (CCP) at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). We concur with the draft recertification memo to recertify ORNL's TRU waste characterization program. In accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR 194.8 (69 FR 42571-42583), on August 21, 2008, EPA approved ORNL's contact-handled (CH) transuranic (TRU) waste characterization program (See EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49, II-A4-103). While, on and February 3, 2009, EPA approved ORNL's remote-handled (RH) TRU waste characterization program (See EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49, II-A4-111). The EPA limitations applicable to the characterization of CH and RH TRU wastes are appropriately included in Attachment 4 of the draft recertification memo. The waste characterization equipment, procedures and processes mentioned in the ORNL draft recertii

- ication memo are consistent with EPA's existing approvals at the site. I'liank you for providing us with an opportunity to review the draft recertification memo for ORNL-CCP. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at 202-343-9462. Sincerely,



### Rajani Joglekar Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Intemet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable * Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Papercc: (Electronic Distribution)

Ed Ziemianski, CBFO Norma Castaneda, CBFO NTP Court Fesmire, CBFO NTP Martin Navarrete, CBFO QA Dennis Miehls, CBFO QA Site Documents, CBFO Tom Peake, EPA Raymond Lee, EPA
[No. 30278-1-II.

Division Two.

May 4, 2004.]

#### *In the Matter of the Marriage of*Charles L. Wilson, *Respondent,*and Beverly S. Wilson, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Cowlitz County, No. 02-3-00359-6, Jill Johanson, J., entered April 18, 2003. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Hunt, J., concurred in by Quinn-Brintnall, C.J., and Morgan, J.
Travis BRADLEY, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

No. ED 106485

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.

Filed: April 2, 2019

Alexandria A. Shah, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, For Movant/Appellant.

Dora A. Fichter, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Respondent/Respondent.

Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and James M. Dowd, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Travis Bradley (Movant) appeals from the motion court's denial of his Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment and Sentence without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court committed no reversible error. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).1

1

Mo. R. Civ. P. 2019.
CHARLESTON.

#### Nuzum *v.*McEldowny.

Submitted September 26, 1898

Decided April 1, 1899.

Tax *Sales*— Sheriff’s *Affidavit*— Deed.

A case in which the questions arising- were discussed and adjudicated in *Winnings. Eakin,*44 W. Va. 19 (p. 208).

Appeal from Circuit Court, Wetzel County.

Suit by Cassie C. Nuzum against John C. McEldowney. Decree for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

*Reversed.*

.Robert McEldowney, for appellant.

Basil T. Bowers, for appellee.

McWhorter, Judge:

This is a suit brought in the circuit court of Wetzel County by Cassie C. Nuzum to set aside a tax deed made by the clerk of the county court of Wetzel County to John C. McEldowney for certain real estate sold by the sheriff of that county on December 11, 1893, for the taxes of the year 1891, which had been returned delinquent. A decree was entered in the cause on the 6th day of July, 1896, holding the deed null and void for alleged irregularities in the sale made by the sheriff, and'setting aside the deed, as well as the sale under which it was made, and giving judgment against defendant for costs, from which decree defendant appealed to this Court. The same questions arising in this cause were adjudicated in the case of *Winning*v. Eakin, 44 W. Va. 19, (28 S. E. 757), which was an *208appeal from a similar decree rendered on the same day by the same court, setting aside a deed tinder a sale made by the sheriff at the same time the sale -was made under which the deed sought to be set aside in this cause was made. After the decision of this Court in the said case, which was rendered on the 17th day of November, 1897, where the points raised in the case are fully discussed, the appellee recognizing the fact of such adjudication, by her counsel, says: “My client declines to have a brief filed in her case, for the reásons that she is poor, and unable, without sacrifice, to pay for printing same, and the same questions arising in her case have already been passed upon by the Court in the case of *Eakin*v. Winning, adversely to her contention in her case.” This being true, I deem it quite unnecessary in this case to discuss and pass upon questions that have been already adjudicated. For the reasons assigned in *Winning*v. Rakin, *supra,*the decree in this cause is reversed and set aside, and plaintiff’s bill dismissed.

*Reversed.*