alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**Certification by theChief Executive Officer**

**Relating to aPeriodic Report Containing Financial Statements**

 

 

I, Jeffrey A.Snider, Chief Executive Officer, of PAULA Financial, a Delaware corporation(the “Company”), hereby certify that:

 

(1)           The Company’s periodic report on Form10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 (the “Form 10-QSB”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)           The financial statements and disclosurescontained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

*              *              *

 

 
| CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER       |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
|                          |   |
|                          |   |
| /s/ Jeffrey A. Snider         |   |   |
| Jeffrey A. Snider             |   |
|                          |   |
| Date:  May 14, 2004 |   |
|                               |        |  |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            75920
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       3868809
<OTHER-SE>                                   (3944729)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 28837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (28837)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (28837)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (28837)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSIT ION THEREOF IF FILED ANDRE DEVEAUX ,

Appellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 23

- 800 LT Case No. 2009

- CF

- 008661

- A STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed June 6, 2023 3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County , Meredith Charbula , Judge. Andre Deveaux, Jasper, pro se. Ashley Moody, Attorney General and Zachary Lawton, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED.

BOATWRIGHT , KILBANE and MACIVER, J J., concur.
STATE of North Carolina v. Kirk Allen WITHAM.

No. 452P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 5, 2006.

Joseph E. Zeszotarski, Jr., Raleigh, for Witham.

K.D. Sturgis, Assistant Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 22nd day of August 2006 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Attorney General, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of October 2006."

*217Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd day of August 2006 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of October 2006."
C&S REALTY CORPORATION v. Ralph M. BLOWE, Jr. and wife, Josephine W. Blowe.

No. 81P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 5, 2006.

M.H. Hood Ellis, Elizabeth City, Robert B. Hobbs, Jr., Nags Head, for Blowe.

M. Greg Crumpler, Rocky Mount, Roy A. Archbell, Jr., Kitty Hawk, for C&S Realty Corp.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 3rd day of March 2006 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of July 2006."

Justice MARTIN recused.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

                             NINTH AMENDMENT TO THE
                            STERLING CHEMICALS, INC.
            AMENDED AND RESTATED HOURLY PAID EMPLOYEES' PENSION PLAN
                                  (the "Plan")

This Amendment to the Plan is adopted to comply with the automatic rollover
rules under Code Section 401(a)(31)(B). The provisions of the Amendment
applicable to the Plan if the Plan Sponsor selects Option 1 are based on the
Model Amendment provided by the Internal Revenue Service in Notice 2005-5. This
Amendment shall supersede the provisions of the Plan to the extent those
provisions are inconsistent with the provisions of this Amendment. The
provisions of this Amendment are effective with respect to distributions made on
or after March 28, 2005.

SELECTION OF COMPLIANCE METHOD
c
For purposes of complying with the requirements of Code Section 401(a)(31)(B),
the Plan Sponsor hereby elects to modify the Plan cash-out provisions to
eliminate mandatory distributions for vested Accrued Benefits with a present
value in excess of $1,000.

MODIFICATION OF CASH-OUT AMOUNT

Section 9.7 of the Plan entitled "Payment of Small Amounts" is hereby amended by
the addition of a paragraph at the end thereof to provide as follows:

      Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section, if the Actuarially
      Equivalent present value of any retirement benefit payable under the Plan
      to a Participant is greater than $1,000, such Actuarially Equivalent
      present value shall not be paid to the Participant in a single sum payment
      prior to the later of (i) the date the Participant attains age 62 or (ii)
      the Participant's Normal Retirement Date, unless the Participant consents
      in writing to such distribution. The provisions of this paragraph shall
      not apply to a distribution to a Participant's surviving spouse or an
      alternate payee under a qualified domestic relations order.

                                      * * *

        EXECUTED this 26th day of July, 2005.

                                By: /s/ Kenneth M. Hale

                                Title: Senior Vice president and General Counsel

                                             Custom Automatic Rollover Amendment
Filed 6/21/16 In re S.O. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re S.O., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile 

Court Law.

TUOLUMNE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF 

SOCIAL SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

S.O.,

Defendant and Appellant.

F072544

(Super. Ct. Nos. JV7385, JV7387, 

JV7388)

OPINION

THE COURT*

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. Donald 

Segerstrom, Judge.

Carol A. Koenig, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant.

Sarah Carrillo, County Counsel, and Cody M. Nesper, Deputy County Counsel, 

for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

 

* Before Hill, P.J., Levy, J. and Peña, J.
2.

In a juvenile dependency proceeding, S.O. (mother) appeals from orders, entered 

on September 29, 2015, that terminated the dependencies of three of her children, S.L.O., 

D.H., and S.H., awarded physical custody to their father, T.H., and ordered once-a-month 

supervised visitation with mother. Mother’s only contention is that the juvenile court 

erred, at the time of the 12-month review hearing, by failing to proceed as if the children 

were Indian children pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 5.482(c). 

By a separate opinion filed on June 13, 2016, which addressed mother’s appeal 

from the orders entered at the 12-month review hearing, we rejected the same contention 

she now raises, concluding that she forfeited the issue by failing to raise it below. (In re 

S.O. et al. (Jun. 13, 2016, F071404) [nonpub. opn.].) Consequently, her current 

challenge is now moot. (In re Audrey D. (1979) 100 Cal.App.3d 34, 39.) Accordingly, 

the appeal from the court’s September 29, 2015, orders is dismissed as moot.

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5661 

To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 

clarify that uncertified States and Indian tribes have the authority to 

use certain payments for certain noncoal reclamation projects. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 31, 2008 

Mr. PEARCE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 

of 1977 to clarify that uncertified States and Indian 

tribes have the authority to use certain payments for 

certain noncoal reclamation projects. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION. 

4 (a) LIMITATION ON FUNDS.—Section 409(b) of the 

5 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 

6 U.S.C. 1239(b)) is amended by inserting ‘‘or section 

7 411(h)(1)’’ after ‘‘section 402(g)’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5661 IH

1 (b) USE OF FUNDS.—Section 411(h)(1)(D)(ii) of the 

2 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 

3 U.S.C. 1240a(h)(1)(D)(ii)) is amended by inserting ‘‘or 

4 409’’ after ‘‘section 403’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
MUELLER v. BRANTLEY

No. COA06-759

Court of Appeal of North Carolina

Filed January 2, 2007

Certification Date January 22, 2007

Appeal from Pitt (02CVS3034).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. Affirmed.
In the Matter of T.S., III and S.M.

No. 384A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 9, 2007.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C.App. ___, 631 S.E.2d 19 (2006), affirming an order entered 15 October 2004 by Judge G. Galen Braddy in District Court, Pitt County. Heard in the Supreme Court 13 February 2007.

Anthony H. Morris, Greenville, for petitioner-appellee Pitt County Department of Social Services.

Richard E. Jester, Louisburg, for respondent-appellant mother.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

Justice HUDSON did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
STATE v. Jeremy Dushane MURRELL.

No. 484A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 1, 2006.

Jennifer Martin, Assistant District Attorney, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 31st day of October 2006 by Defendant for Extension of time to Serve Proposed Record on Appeal:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant shall have up to and including the 21st day of December 2006 to serve his/her proposed record upon the district attorney. The parties shall then proceed to settle and file the record on appeal pursuant to the provisions of Appellate Rules 11 and 12. By order of the Court in conference this the 1st day of November 2006."
STATE of North Carolina v. Darrian DeLOACH.

No. 311P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

Darrian DeLoatch, Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 13th day of June 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Forsyth County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

*539"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."
STATE v. Lavelle AULTMAN.

No. 97P04-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2006.

John G. Barnwell, Assistant Attorney General, Sam Currin, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th day of December 2005 by Defendant for "Petition to Review Decisions":

*384"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of January 2006."
Exhibit
32.1





TELETOUCH
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.





OFFICER’S
CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. 1350)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS,
INC. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended February 28, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, Robert M. McMurrey, Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:





1.
            The
      Report is in full compliance with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
  and





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





/s/Robert M.
      McMurreyRobert
      M. McMurreyChief
      Executive OfficerApril
      14, 2010
PEREZ v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, et al.

No. 661PA05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 28, 2006.

Joy H. Brewer, Cary, Kimberly A. D'Arruda, for American Airlines, et al.

John A. Hedrick, Samuel A. Scudder, Raleigh, for Lori Perez.

Joe E. Austin, Jr., Jennifer T. Gottsegen, Raleigh, for NC Asso. Defense Attorneys.

Julia S. Hooten, Raleigh, for NCBBI.

*570The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd day of August 2006 by NCBBI for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Unless already submitted, the Amicus Brief shall be submitted to the court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 28(i). By order of the Court in conference this the 28th day of August 2006."
December 1 7 , 2015



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

UWAKWE C. OKO AND VI CTORIA I. OKO , Appellant s

NO. 14

- 15

- 00505

- CV V.

TONY ALI, JUNIOR PROPERTIES , LLC, AND EVERBANK , Appellee s

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the order signed by the court below on June 4 , 2015. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant s , Uwakwe C. Oko and Victoria I. Oko.

We further order this decision cer tified below for observance.
**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

Inconnection with the Annual Report of MarkWest Hydrocarbon, Inc. (the “Company”),on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Frank M. Semple, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| Date: March 7, 2007 |   |   | By:    | /S/FRANK M. SEMPLE                                                   |
|---------------------|--------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                |   |   |   | Frank M. Semple                                                      |
|                |   |   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

Thiscertification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosuredocument. This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes ofSection 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”), or otherwise subject to liability under that section. This certificationshall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under theSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the extentthis Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by referencein any such filing.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1252/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1252/2013 of 3 December 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1252/2013                     

# of 3 December 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 December 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
Order filed March 8, 2022 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-21-00271-CV

____________

KENNETH L. SUGG, JR. AND MARINA F. CASTILLO SUGG, Appellants

V.

LAKEISHA RANDLE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 269th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2019-25325

O R D E R

Appellants’ brief was due February 2, 2022. No brief or motion for 

extension of time has been filed. 

Unless appellants file a brief with this court on or before April 7, 2022, the 

court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Poissant and Wilson.
STATE v. LITTLE.

No. COA05-985.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed August 15, 2006.

Certification Date September 5, 2006.

Appeal from Rowan (04CRS54573, 04CRS12112).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
Salary Continuation Following Death Benefit Letter to Jeffrey W. Taylor



 EXHIBIT 10.44 
  

			
	Date:	  	June 15, 2005
		
	To:	  	Jeff Taylor
		
	From:	  	Pam Mellor, Dir. Compensation and Benefits, Cole Taylor Bank
		
	Cc:	  	Key Man Life Insurance File
	 	  	Personnel File
	 	  	Christine Sibrava, at Katten, Muchin, Rosenmann
		
	Subject:	  	Salary Continuation Following Death

  
 I am pleased to inform you of a
benefit that was approved for you at the June 14, 2005 Taylor Capital Group, Inc. Compensation Committee meeting. The Committee members discussed and approved a salary continuation benefit for your family following your death. The specifics of this
benefit are as follows: 
  

	 	•	 	One times your then base annual salary will be paid to your spouse / family / estate following your death. 

  

	 	•	 	The payments will be provided as 1/12th of your
then base annual salary in equal installments each month until 12 payments totaling your then base annual salary have been paid. The first installment will be provided as soon as possible following your death. The remaining 11 installments will be
provided during the first week of each month. 

  

	 	•	 	You are required to be an active employee of the company at the time of death in order to qualify for the salary continuation payments. 

  
 The funding of the salary continuation will occur from Key Man Life Insurance policies the
company purchased in late 2004. Though these policies have a 20-year term, the Company will provide the salary continuation benefit should you continue to be an active employee of the Company following the expiration of the Key Man Life Insurance
policy. If you have any questions regarding this benefit, please feel free to contact me at extension 7309.