alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Woods-Hoskins-Young Company, a Corporation, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Stone & Baker Construction Company, *Defendant in Error.*

En Banc.

Opinion Filed August 1, 1927.

Petition for Rehearing Denied October 13, 1927.

*587*McCune, Casey, Hiaasen & Fleming,*Attorneys for Plaintiff in Error;

*George W. Tedder,*Attorney for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

In this case declaration was filed in three counts. The first count was on contract. The second count was a common count for work done and materials furnished, and the third was a common count for money found to be due on account stated. The sufficiency of the declaration was not challenged by demurrer or otherwise.

There were five pleas to the declaration. There was issue joined on the first plea and replication filed to the remaining four pleas. Trial was had, resulting in a verdict in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $7,265.29 on which judgment was entered, to which judgment writ of error was taken. The record discloses no material errors of law.

There were conflicts in the testimony which were settled by the verdict of the jury which verdict has sufficient supporting evidence.

The amount of recovery was limited by the *ad damnum*clause in the declaration. In each count of the declaration the *ad damnum*clause fixed the amount claimed at $6,854.05. The verdict was excessive in that it found for the plaintiff in the sum claimed together with interest in the further sum of $411.24. The order of the. Court is that the judgment of the Circuit Court be reversed and a new trial granted, unless the appellee, or his attorney, *588within 30 days after filing of the mandate of this Court in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court shall file with the clerk of said court a remittitur as included in the verdict and upon the filing of said remittitur the judgment shall stand for the balance of said recovery as. the judgment of the Circuit Court to be enforced according to law. If said remittitur shall not be entered as aforesaid the judgment will upon the expiration of said 30 days be held to be vacated and a new trial awarded. The costs of this appeal, will be taxed against the appellee.

Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.

Terrell, J., not participating.
**Exhibit 12.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Patrick Flynn, certifythat: 

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of ING Groep N.V.; 

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 thestatements 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 thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The company’sother 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company 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 relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared; 

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to bedesigned under our 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; 

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

(d) Disclosed in this report anychange 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 overfinancial reporting; and 

5. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’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 likelyto adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b) Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date:March 16, 2015
William Richard ARMSTEAD v. Teresa ARMSTEAD

2160587

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

November 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Patrick GAMMAGE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1039

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
---

Section 1350 Certifications CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND 
  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Zhiying Zhao, President, Secretary, Treasurer and Director of The Medical Exchange Inc. (who also performs as the Principal Executive Officer and Princiapl Financial Officer) certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (the "Report") for the
quarter ended December 31, 2005, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof:

(i) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

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

|Date: February 10, 2006 | By: | /s/ Zhiying Zhao                             
|----------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------------
|                        |     | Zhiying Zhao                                 
|                        |     | President, Secretary Treasurer and a member  
|                        |     | of the Board of Directors (who also performs 
|                        |     | as the Principal Executive Offier , Principal
|                        |     | Financial officer and Accounting Officer)    

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Medical Exchange Inc. and will be retained by The Medical Exchange Inc.. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Case 3:05-cv-01928-M Document 91-3 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 3:05-cv-01928-M Document 91-3 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 3:05-cv-01928-M Document 91-3 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 3:05-cv-01928-M Document 91-3 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 4 of 4
Russell BALENGER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY FSB, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0481

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-20001 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PEDRO SALGADO PACHECO,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

H-00-CR-467-1

-------------------- September 19, 2001 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Defendant-Appellant Pedro Salgado Pacheo appeals his

conviction and sentence for possession with the intent to

distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. Pacheo waived a

jury trial after the district court denied his motion to suppress

evidence, and the district court convicted him based on stipulated

facts. On appeal, Pacheo challenges the district court’s denial of

the m otion to suppress. He also urges that the district court

clearly erred in granting him only a two-level reduction in offense

level for acceptance of responsibility and in denying his request2

for a two-point reduction under U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(6) and 5C1.2.

Pacheo argues that the district court should have suppressed

evidence found in a warrantless search because the lessee of the

house, Evelyn Zumaya, lacked authority to consent to a search of a

bedroom that she allegedly subleased to Pacheo. We find no error,

clear or otherwise, in the district court’s determination, based on

testimony in person at the suppression hearing, that Ms. Zumaya had

both actual a nd apparent authority to consent to the search.

United States v. Foy , 28 F.3d 464, 474 (5th Cir. 1994); U nited

States v. Matlock

, 415 U.S. 164, 171 (1974). We note that, by

failing to brief the issue, Pacheo has abandoned any challenge to

the d istrict court’s denial of his motion to suppress statements

that he made following his arrest.

We find no error in the district court’s determination that,

hav ing received a two-level reduction in offense level for

acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a), Pacheo was

not entitled to an additional one-level reduction in offense level

pursuant to § 3E1.1(b). United States v. Anderson , 174 F.3d 515,

525 (5th Cir. 1999). We also find no error in the district court’s

determination that Pacheo was not entitled to a two-point reduction

under U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(6) and 5C1.2. U nited States v. Edwards

,

65 F.3d 430, 433 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Sotelo

, 97 F.3d

782, 799 (5th Cir. 1996).

AFFIRMED.
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 on Form 10-QSB of Pacific Coast National
      Bancorp (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 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),
                as
                applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
                and




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




PACIFIC
      COAST NATIONAL BANCORP




Dated:
      August 18, 2006


By: /s/
      Colin
      M. Forkner


Colin
      M.
      Forkner


Chief
      Executive Officer




Dated:
      August 18, 2006


By: /s/
      Terry
      Stalk


Terry
      Stalk


Chief
      Financial Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 (“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 Pacific Coast National Bancorp and will be retained by Pacific
      Coast
      National Bancorp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
      its
      staff upon request.
Statement

Kenneth A. Spearman, Board Chairman

Farm Credit Administration Board Meeting

March 10, 2016

The Capital Rule that we are voting to finalize today will update and modernize the Farm Credit 

Administration’s capital requirements, and the language we use to discuss them, consistent with

best industry practices and comparable with those of the U.S. banking sector. On becoming

FCA Chairman, one of my priorities for this Board was to finalize this important rulemaking.

FCA recognized that the Farm Credit System would benefit by conforming, where appropriate, 

to the standards of the Basel III framework and the Federal banking regulatory agencies’ rules.

This rule represents untold hours of work and research by the staff as to how best to apply 

Basel principles to the System’s cooperative structure.

In this rule, I believe we have achieved a good balance between following Basel principles and 

giving the System the flexibility it needs to meet its mission as a government-sponsored 

enterprise. What’s more, this rule will ensure that the System continues to remain safe and 

sound, which is our primary responsibility here at FCA.

Finalizing this rule was a difficult undertaking, and it was truly a team effort. I want to 

acknowledge the work and vision of my former Board colleagues who served during this 

rulemaking. Also, I want to thank Bill Hoffman and the senior staff for their work to ensure we 

had the resources to produce the comprehensive rule we have before us. I want to particularly 

acknowledge the members of the Capital Workgroup for their diligence in this effort: J.C. Floyd, 

Becky Orlich, Jennifer Cohn, Tim Nerdahl, Jeremy Edelstein, Chris Wilson, Curtis Bednarz, 

Ryan Hellen, Wade Wynn, and Bill Dunn.
Case 2:05-cv-00315-J Document 15 Filed 03/23/07 Page 1 of 2 PageID 57
 

 Case 2:05-cv-00315-J Document 15 Filed 03/23/07 Page 2 of 2 PageID 58
Exhibit 32.2
 HORIZON LINES, INC.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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/ MICHAEL T. AVARAMichael T. AvaraSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
John SEXTON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0221

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
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 Education Realty Trust, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Randy Churchey, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, in my capacity
as an officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





Date:
November 4, 2010


/s/ Randy ChurcheyRandy
      ChurcheyChief
      Executive Officer





In
accordance with SEC Release No. 34-47986, this Exhibit is furnished to the
SEC as an accompanying document and is not deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to
the liabilities of that Section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933.
Michael Joseph ANDREWS v. Shari Lynn ANDREWS

2160433

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

January 26, 2018

Affirmed.
# C_2016243EN.01004101.xml

| 4.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 243/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 243/41

---

Action brought on 9 May 2016 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Elho Business & Sport (FREE STYLE)

(Case T-213/16)

(2016/C 243/45)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Elho Business & Sport Vertriebs GmbH (Munich, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘FREE STYLE’— EU trade mark No 4 761 731

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 February 2016 in Case R 387/2015-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order the party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

The pleas in law and principal arguments are those put forward in Case T-212/16, El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Elho Business & Sport (FRee STyLe).

El Corte Inglés

EUIPO — Elho Business & Sport (FRee STyLe)

---
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO OF ALLIED SECURITY HOLDINGS LLC
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 on Form 10-Q of Allied Security Holdings LLC (the ‘‘Company’’) for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), William C. Whitmore, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and William A. Torzolini, as 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, that, to the best of his 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/ William C. Whitmore, Jr.
Name: William C. Whitmore, Jr.
Title: Chairman, President, Chief Executive
Officer and Manager
Date: November 14, 2007

/s/ William A. Torzolini
Name: William A. Torzolini
Title: Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Date: November 14, 2007

---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.11

                               December 2, 1998


Leslie A. Galbraith
53 Collie Brook Road
East Hampton, CT  06424

Dear Leslie:

     Reference is made to that certain employment agreement (the "Employment
Agreement") dated August 25, 1997 between First National Bank of New England
(now known as First International Bank, National Association) (the "Bank") and
you.

     The Bank and you agree that the Employment Agreement is amended to provide
that, beginning as of the date hereof, you will be employed as President, Chief
Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Bank (or equivalent titles)
in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement.

     Except to the extent expressly amended herein, the Employment Agreement
remains unmodified and in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.

     Please sign in the space provided below to indicate your acceptance of the
foregoing.

                                   Very truly yours,

                                   FIRST INTERNATIONAL BANK,
                                   NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

                                       /s/ Brett N. Silvers
                                   By:___________________________________
                                      Brett N. Silvers
                                      Its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Agreed to:

/s/ Leslie A. Galbraith
_____________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JOHN DOWNIE, §

Plaintiff, §

 § CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. § 3:05-CV-1640-P

 § (ECF)

COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL §

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, §

Defendant. §

ORDER

After making an independent review of the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of

the United States Magistrate Judge, the Court finds that they are correct.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the

United States Magistrate Judge are adopted.

SIGNED this 29 day of March 2007. th

_________________________________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01640-P Document 18 Filed 03/29/07 Page 1 of 1 PageID 109
Kevin Marcus BOYD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3773

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 22, 2019

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Daniel Krumbholz, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Appellant challenges the trial court's order modifying his probation because he contends the State failed to put forward evidence that he willfully violated two conditions. We affirm the trial court's finding that appellant willfully violated his probation by ignoring his financial obligation.

However, we find the trial court erred in finding appellant willfully violated the condition of his probation requiring him to maintain either full-time employment or full-time education. Such a provision is invalid as a matter of law unless it provides a "good faith effort" exception. *See* *Aviles v. State* , 165 So.3d 841, 843 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that a full-time employment condition of probation was invalid because it did not contain an exception if factors outside of the probationer's control could prevent completion of the requirement); *see also* *Silas v. State* , 208 So.3d 1289, 1290 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding that a condition of probation requiring a probationer to obtain a GED was invalid because it did not provide a "good faith effort" exception).

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the trial court's order modifying appellant's probation but REMAND for entry of a corrected modification order. *See* *Redd v. State* , 204 So.3d 558, 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

Wolf, Osterhaus, and Jay, JJ., concur.