alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

      I, Michael Mullarkey, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Workstream Inc.;

      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
the statements 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 the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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)) for the registrant and we have:

            (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

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

            (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

      5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant'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 likely to adversely affect the registrant'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 have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

Dated: November 1, 2004
                                       /s/ Michael Mullarkey
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Michael Mullarkey
                                       Chief Executive Officer
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 45-10 Filed 07/13/2007 Page 7 of 7
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-34552, 333-91737, 333-52012, 333-49842 and 333-45486)
pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan, 1999 Director Option Plan, Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, 1999 Stock Incentive Plan, 2000 Supplemental Stock Option
Plan, Entera, Inc. 1999 Equity Incentive Plan, Entera, Inc. 2000 Equity
Incentive Plan, SpringBank Networks, Inc. 2000 Stock Incentive Plan, Shares
Acquired Under Written Compensation Agreements, and Options Granted Under
Written Compensation Agreements of CacheFlow Inc. and the Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-55744) and in the related prospectus of CacheFlow
Inc. for the registration of 222,287 common shares of our report dated May 14,
2000 (except for Note 17 as to which the date is June 29, 2001), with respect
to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of CacheFlow Inc.
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended April 30, 2001.

                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Walnut Creek, California
July 10, 2001
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
HEI, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 33-33322, 33-46928, 33-46929 and 333-49489) on Form S-8 of HEI, Inc. of
our reports dated October 5, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of HEI, Inc. and subsidiaries, as of August 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders' equity, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended August 31, 2001 and
the related financial statement schedule, which reports appear in the August 31,
2001 annual report on Form 10-K of HEI, Inc.


                                    KPMG LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
November 8, 2001
#### IN RE MARTIN

No. 27 PC.

Case below: 22 N.C. App. 225.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 3 September 1974.
Case 1:07-cv-03433-TPG Document 11-2 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03433-TPG Document 11-2 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-129406) pertaining to the 1999 Equity IncentivePlan, Miscellaneous Stock Option Agreements, 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, 2005 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan, and 2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Website Pros, Inc. of our report dated February 10, 2006, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements of Website Pros, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

 

Jacksonville, Florida 

March 1, 2006
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-10607

Summary Calendar

 

JAMES PRESTON HOPEWELL,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:95-CV-965-X

- - - - - - - - - -

April 26, 1999

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Preston Hopewell, Texas prisoner # 300023, appeals the

district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ

of habeas corpus. Hopewell alleged that he was denied effective

assistance of counsel because his trial attorney allowed him to

be tried on six felony charges before one jury.

We have reviewed thoroughly the briefs, the record, and the

applicable law, and hold that Hopewell has failed to show that 
No. 97-10607

-2-

counsel’s alleged errors were both deficient and prejudicial. 

See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).

Accordingly, he is not entitled to habeas relief on the basis of

ineffective assistance of counsel.

AFFIRMED.
Document

 
			
	 




			
	



			
	 




			
	 




			
	 






EXHIBIT 4 (b) (xxi)


19 April 2021




Strictly Private & Confidential    
William Chalmers












Dear William


I’d like to start by thanking you on behalf of the Board for agreeing to assume the additional responsibilities of Acting Group Chief Executive in the interim period between António leaving at the end of April and Charlie joining on 16 August 2021.
Alongside Alan Dickinson, I will work closely with you to support you so that, through your leadership, we continue to help our customers in these unprecedented times and focus on the things that matter to Lloyds Banking Group.  Further, I trust with the support of the team changes we’ve put in place, you can successfully continue your ongoing responsibilities as Group Chief Financial Officer. I really do appreciate your extra support and commitment.
I’m pleased to confirm that for the period you assume the additional responsibilities you will be paid a deputisation allowance and receive an increased Fixed Share Award. The deputisation allowance will be £314,163 on a full-year equivalent basis and your Fixed Share Award will be increased from £504,000 to £723,750 payable on a quarterly basis in line with the Fixed Share Award terms as set out in the Addendum to your Executive Service Agreement. The combination of these elements will amount to 85% of that proposed to be paid to the new GCE, in line with group policy on deputisations - with the full difference being included on the salary element. Both elements will be time pro-rated on a daily basis; details are provided below. Further, any 2021 Group Performance Share will be determined on your performance across both roles and your combined salary and deputisation allowance for the period you are carrying out the additional responsibilities.


															
		Proposal for Acting GCE 
(full-year equivalent)
	Current	Additional amount (full-year equivalent)
	Time pro-rated additional amount
(75 working days)

	Salary	£1,125,000	£810,837	£314,163	£90,277
	Fixed Share Award	£723,750	£504,000	£219,750	£63,147


All other terms and conditions of your Service Agreement dated 14 February 2019 remain unchanged.
Once again, thank you in advance for your commitment during the transition to maintain momentum in delivering our strategy and support our customers as we help Britain recover.
I wish you well in the role.
Kind regards
/s/ Robin Budenberg
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-84,836-01

EX PARTE BENITO DAVILA, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 15143C-A IN THE 29TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM PALO PINTO COUNTY

Per curiam. ALCALA, J., filed a concurring opinion in which JOHNSON, J., joined.

YEARY, J., filed a concurring opinion in which KEASLER, and HERVEY, JJ., joined.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of engaging in

organized criminal activity and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his

conviction.

Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel

failed to challenge the voluntariness of Applicant’s confession, failed to investigate whether

Applicant’s confession was taken in violation of Miranda, and failed to challenge the trial court’s
2

jurisdiction. 

Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The

trial court may use any means set out in TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d).

If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. 

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an

attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. 

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the

performance of Applicant’s trial counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient

performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and

conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for

habeas corpus relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall

be obtained from this Court. 

Filed: June 29, 2016

Do not publish
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1447 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1447

      To allow the financing by United States persons of sales of 
                   agricultural commodities to Cuba.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2019

Mr. Bennet (for himself, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Udall, Mr. King, Mr. Warner, 
  Mr. Moran, Ms. Collins, Ms. Stabenow, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Enzi, Mr. 
Leahy, Mr. Cramer, and Mr. Hoeven) introduced the following bill; which 
 was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
                             Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To allow the financing by United States persons of sales of 
                   agricultural commodities to Cuba.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Agricultural Export Expansion Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. FINANCING OF SALES OF AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES TO CUBA.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law (other 
than section 908 of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement 
Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7207), as amended by subsection (c)), a person 
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States may provide payment or 
financing terms for sales of agricultural commodities to Cuba or an 
individual or entity in Cuba.
    (b) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Agricultural commodity.--The term ``agricultural 
        commodity'' has the meaning given that term in section 102 of 
        the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5602).
            (2) Financing.--The term ``financing'' includes any loan or 
        extension of credit.
    (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 908 of the Trade Sanctions 
Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7207) is amended--
            (1) in the section heading, by striking ``and financing'';
            (2) by striking subsection (b);
            (3) in subsection (a)--
                    (A) by striking ``Prohibition'' and all that 
                follows through ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding'' 
                and inserting ``In General.--Notwithstanding''; and
                    (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as 
                subsections (b) and (c), respectively, and by moving 
                those subsections, as so redesignated, 2 ems to the 
                left; and
            (4) by striking ``paragraph (1)'' each place it appears and 
        inserting ``subsection (a)''.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE v. SCOTT

No. 98 PC.

Case below: 16 N.C. App. 424.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 December 1972.
| 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DATE:  | September 14, 2009 | By:                                                                             | /s/ Steve Purello     |
|--------|--------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
|   |               | Steve PurelloPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) |
|   |               |                                                                            |
|   |               |                                                                            |
| DATE:  | September 14, 2009 | By:                                                                             | /s/ Michael Mullarkey |
|   |               | Michael MullarkeyActing Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)    |
#### MacArthur Bros. Company et al., Appellants, *v.*The City of New York, Respondent.

*MacArthur Bros. Co.*v. *City of New York,*177 App. Div. 725, affirmed,

(Argued October 7, 1918;

decided October 22, 1918.)

Appeal, by permission, from a judgment entered May 14, 1917, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, overruling plaintiffs’ exceptions, ordered to be heard in the first instance by the Appellate Division, denying a motion for a new trial and directing judgment in favor of defendant upon the verdict directed by the trial court. The plaintiffs contracted with the city of New York through the aqueduct commissioners to construct the Cross river reservoir in Westchester county. They proceeded with their work, and payments were made upon the certificate of the engineer from time to time until, in August, 1908, plaintiffs received a draft by the comptroller upon the chamberlain of the city of New York for the sum of $157,514.67, which was stated in the draft to be *“*for and in full payment of contract No. 13,149, construction of the Cross river reservoir, reservoir N in towns of Bedford, Lewdsborough and Poundridge, Westchester county. Voucher received.” Thereafter this action was brought against the city, in which action are included fifteen claims for different causes of action. The action was brought on for trial, and certain of the claims dismissed pending the trial. Thereafter motions for a directed verdict were made by both parties, whereupon the court took the papers and afterwards dismissed the complaint. The defendant contended that plaintiffs’ receipt of the final payment of $157,514 operated to release all other claims under article XXIX of the contract, which read as follows: *“*The acceptance by the contractor of the last payment aforesaid shall operate as and shall be a release to the City, the” Commissioners, and each of them, and their agents, from all claim and *630liability to the contractor for anything done or furnished for or relating to the work, or for any act or neglect of the City or any person relating to or affecting the work, except the claim against the City for the remainder, if any there be, of the amounts kept or retained as provided by Article XXIII.” It was not claimed that the causes of action in question were within the exception.

*Samuel Seábury, Anthony J. Ernest, W. Bourke Cochran*and *John B. Johnston*for appellants.

*William P. Burr, Corporation Counsel (Terence Farley*and *John F. O’Brien*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Collin, Cuddeback, Pound and Crane, JJ. Dissenting as to seventh cause of action: Cardozo and Andrews, JJ.
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 2 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 3 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 4 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 5 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 6 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 7 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 8 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03387-LBS Document 2 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 9 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 10 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 10 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 10.1
                               AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
                             FOUR OAKS FINCORP, INC.
                         NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION PLAN

         THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 of the Four Oaks Fincorp, Inc. Non-qualified Stock
Option Plan  (Amended and Restated May 17, 2001) (the "Plan") is effective as of
September 1, 2009.

         WHEREAS, Four Oaks Fincorp, Inc. (the "Company") maintains the Plan;

         WHEREAS, after giving effect to prior stock splits, the Board of
Directors of the Company (the "Board") has reserved a total of 1,220,702 shares
of the Company's common stock for issuance under the Plan;

         WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is in the best interest of
the Company to increase the number of shares of common stock available for
issuance under the Plan by 200,000 shares; and

         WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12 of the Plan, the Board may make such
amendments to the Plan as it shall deem advisable.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan shall be amended as follows:

         1. The first sentence of Section 2 of the Plan shall be deleted in its
entirety and the following substituted in lieu thereof:

         Subject to the  provisions  of  Paragraph  10 of the Plan,  the Holding
         Company's  Board of Directors  (the "Board") shall reserve for issuance
         upon the exercise of options to be granted  under the Plan from time to
         time an aggregate of One Million Four  Hundred  Twenty  Thousand  Seven
         Hundred Two (1,420,702)  shares of the Holding  Company's common stock,
         par value one dollar ($1.00) per share ("Common  Stock"),  which shares
         shall be authorized and unissued shares of Common Stock.

         2. Except as herein amended, the terms and provisions of the Plan shall
remain in full force and effect as previously adopted.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hereby certifies that this
Amendment was duly adopted by the Board on June 22, 2009.

                                     FOUR OAKS FINCORP, INC.


                                     By: /s/ Wanda J. Blow
                                         -------------------------------
                                         Wanda J. Blow, Secretary
Case 1:07-cv-03475-LAP Document 7-3 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 1 of 1