alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT32**

 

            Harry Lee WaterfieldII and Raymond L. Carr, being the President and Vice President, Chief FinancialOfficer, respectively, of Investors Heritage Capital Corporation, hereby certify as of this____thday of December, 2009, that the Form 10-Q/A for the Quarter ended September 30, 2009fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q/Afairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of Investors Heritage Capital Corporation.

 

 

|   | **INVESTORS			HERITAGE CAPITAL CORPORATION** 
  
BY:  /s/Harry			Lee Waterfield II 
Harry Lee			Waterfield II
DATE:			December ___, 2009
President 
  
			BY:  /s/Raymond L. Carr 
Raymond L.			Carr
DATE: December			___, 2009
Vice President			- Chief Financial Officer
  |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Case 1:07-cv-03473-GEL Document 9 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 1 of 1
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 Annual Report of Gameplan, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I, Robert Berry, Chief Executive Officer, and principal financial officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.



|      |                |  |     |                                                                                
|----- | -------------- |  | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: | March 31, 2011 |  | By: | /s/Robert Berry                                                                
|      |                |  |     | Robert Berry, Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Director
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 44 Filed 08/09/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 44 Filed 08/09/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 44 Filed 08/09/2007 Page 3 of 3
**CERTIFICATIONS  **Exhibit 31.2
   
I, Raymond L. Carr, certify that:
  
1.
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2005 of Kentucky Investors, 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 controls over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting; and
  
5.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors:
   
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls 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 controls over financial reporting.  
Date: August 11, 2005
By: /s/ 
Raymond L. Carr 
Chief Financial Officer - Vice President****
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
      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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over
financial reporting to be designed 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 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;d)
    
    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
  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; andb)
    
    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.
 Date: March 31, 2011By:
    /s/ MARK C. LAYTONChief Executive Officer
#### TAYLOR v. CRISP

No. 108 PC.

Case below: 21 N.C. App. 359.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 1 July 1974.
# Exhibit 23.1

Opinion of Dixon Hughes PLLC (f.k.a. Crisp Hughes Evans, LLP)

---

# Exhibit 23.1

# Independent
Auditors Report

To the Board of Directors
and Stockholders ofFirst National Bancshares, Inc.Spartanburg, South Carolina

We have audited the accompanying
consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders equity and
comprehensive income, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2001 of First
National Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiary. These consolidated financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance
with U.S. generally accepted auditing standards. Those standard require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements
are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as
well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated
financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
results of operations and cash flows of First National Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiary for
the year ended December 31, 2001, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.

/s/ Dixon Hughes PLLCSpartanburg,
South Carolina January 23, 2002, except for the effects of the 3-for-2 
    stock split discussed in Note 1, as to
which the date     is March 2, 2004
Case 1:06-cv-14856-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6867

EMMETT MADISON GRAHAM, JR.,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 versus

JOHN D. ASHCROFT, Attorney General; HARLEY G.

LAPPIN; K. J. WENDT; JANET BUNTS, Health Care

Administrator; ABDULMALEK SABBAGH,

Cardiologist; M. L. VELTRI, Unit Manager;

DORIS WILLIAMS, Doctor, Medical Director,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior

District Judge. (2:05-cv-00089-REM)

Submitted: October 11, 2007 Decided: October 17, 2007

Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Emmett Madison Graham, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Emmett Madison Graham, Jr., appeals the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six

Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388

(1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Graham v. Ashcroft, No. 2:05-cv-00089-REM (N.D.W. Va.

May 24, 2007). We deny Graham’s motions for appointment of counsel

and to stay the case. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE>
                                                                                                 EXHIBIT 12

                     KENTUCKY POWER COMPANY
        Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                (in thousands except ratio data)
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                    Twelve
                                                                                                    Months
                                                              Year Ended December 31,               Ended
                                                  1995       1996       1997       1998      1999   3/31/00
<S>                                             <C>        <C>        <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
Fixed Charges:
  Interest on First Mortgage Bonds . . . . . .  $19,090    $14,914    $14,867   $13,936   $12,712   $11,622
  Interest on Other Long-term Debt . . . . . .    2,422      6,446      8,597    12,188    13,525    14,445
  Interest on Short-term Debt. . . . . . . . .    2,242      2,849      3,034     2,455     2,552     2,950
  Miscellaneous Interest Charges . . . . . . .      510        555        559       634       869       962
  Estimated Interest Element in Lease Rentals.      700        800      1,700     1,500     1,200     1,200
       Total Fixed Charges . . . . . . . . . .  $24,964    $25,564    $28,757   $30,713   $30,858   $31,179

Earnings:
  Net Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $25,128    $16,973    $20,746   $21,676   $25,430   $25,273
  Plus Federal Income Taxes. . . . . . . . . .    3,914      5,119      9,415     9,785    12,993    12,898
  Plus State Income Taxes. . . . . . . . . . .    1,420        598      2,190     2,096     2,784     3,206
  Plus Fixed Charges (as above). . . . . . . .   24,964     25,564     28,757    30,713    30,858    31,179
       Total Earnings. . . . . . . . . . . . .  $55,426    $48,254    $61,108   $64,270   $72,065   $72,556

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges . . . . . .     2.22       1.88       2.12      2.09      2.33      2.32
</TABLE>
Amendment no. 6 to the Advisory Agreement



 Exhibit 10.7 
 AMENDMENT NO. 6 
 TO THE 
 ADVISORY AGREEMENT 
 This amendment no. 6 to the Advisory Agreement dated as of November 8, 2008 (the
“Advisory Agreement”) between KBS Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), and KBS Capital Advisors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Advisor”), is entered as of
June 4, 2009 (the “Amendment”). Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meaning set forth in the Advisory Agreement and Amendment no. 1 to the Advisory Agreement dated January 7, 2009. 
 WHEREAS, upon the terms set forth in this Amendment, the Advisor has agreed to amend and restate Article 16 of the Advisory Agreement and advance funds
to the Company upon the terms set forth below. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree that Article 16 of the Advisory Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 
 ADVANCE 
 Notwithstanding anything contained in Article 9 of this Agreement to the contrary, the Advisor
hereby agrees to advance funds (the “Advance”) to the Company equal to the amount by which the cumulative amount of distributions declared by the Company from January 1, 2006 through the period ending August 31, 2009 exceeds the
amount of the Company’s Funds from Operations from January 1, 2006 through August 31, 2009. Advisor further agrees that the Company will only be obligated to reimburse the Advisor for the Advance if and to the extent that the
Company’s cumulative Funds from Operations for the period commencing January 1, 2006 through the date of any such reimbursement exceeds the lesser of (i) the cumulative amount of any distributions declared and payable to the
Company’s Stockholders as of the date of such reimbursement or (ii) an amount that is equal to a 7.0% cumulative, non-compounded, annual return on Invested Capital for the Company’s Stockholders for the period from July 18, 2006
through the date of such reimbursement. Advisor understands and agrees that no interest shall accrue on the Advance being made under this Agreement. 
 Signature page follows. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date and year first above
written. 
  
  

									
	KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST, INC.
			
		 	By:	 	 /s/ Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.

		 		 	Charles J. Schreiber, Jr., Chief Executive Officer
	
	  
 KBS CAPITAL ADVISORS LLC

			
		 	By:	 	Schreiber Real Estate Investments, L.P., a Manager
				
		 		 	By:	 	Schreiber Investments, LLC, as general partner
					
		 		 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.

		 		 		 		 	Charles J. Schreiber, Jr., Manager
Case 1:07-cv-03438-PKC Document 8-3 Filed 05/22/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03438-PKC Document 8-3 Filed 05/22/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03438-PKC Document 8-3 Filed 05/22/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03438-PKC Document 8-3 Filed 05/22/2007 Page 4 of 4
#### STATE v. LOMBARDO

No. 259 PC.

No. 130 (Fall Term).

Case below: 52 N.C. App. 316.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 6 October 1981. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question denied 6 October 1981.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00020

- CV

CELIA MARIE SALAZAR, INDIVIDUALLY AS NEX T FRIEND OF

HER MINOR DAUGHTER, E.N.S.

v. HELEN B. BROWN

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No

. 1 of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2017CCV

- 60263

- 1

JUDG MENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certified below for observance. February 14, 2019
Case 1:06-cv-15128-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. GRAYSON R. DAVIS.

(Filed 2 December, 1964.)

Appeal by defendant from *Shaw,*February 3, 1964 Criminal Session, Guilfoed Superior Court, Greensboro Division.

. At the January 11, 1960 Term, Guilford Superior Court, the defendant and 'two others were tried and e'onvieted on three bills of indictment, each charging a.felony as follows: '(1) Breaking and entering; (2) possessing, without lawful excuse, .certain described implements of house breaking fitted and designed for'use in burglary, etc.; and (3) larceny of an automobile. The three cases were consolidated for judgment. A prison sentence of seven to ten years was imposed on the present defendant for the possession of burglary tools; and a sentence of 18 months, to run concurrently, was imposed for the larceny of the automobile. Apparently no judgment was entered on the house breaking charge.

The petitioner challenged the legality of his imprisonment by *habeas corpus.*His petition was,.denied. However, on January 7, 1963, he filed a petition for a post conviction hearing upon the ground that he was an indigent, not able to employ counsel, and was not represented in the 1960 trial. Judge Shaw appointed counsel and at the post conviction hearing set aside the convictions and ordered a new trial on each of the three indictments. At the new trial held at February, 1964 Session, defendant was again convicted on the three charges. However, after the jury verdict was returned, Judge Shaw set aside the convictions for house breaking and for larceny, but imposed a sentence of seven to ten years for possession of the burglary tools. From that conviction and sentence, the defendant has appealed.

*T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, Harry W. McGalliard, Deputy Attorney General, Richard T. Sanders, Assistant Attorney General for the State.*

*E.. L. Alston, Jr., for defendant appellant.*

Pee Cueiam.

At all stages since he petitioned for his post conviction hearing, the defendant has been represented by court-appointed counsel. In two instances he seems to have found fault with his attorney, and the court, after hearing, permitted counsel to withdraw. However, other counsel were immediately appointed. The record discloses the defendant has been properly represented at all times material to the present inquiry.

*128At the trial now here for review, Judge Shaw set aside the conviction on the charge of house breaking, whether as being against the greater weight of the evidence, or that no judgment was entered on that charge in the 1960 trial, the record does not disclose. The reason for setting the verdict aside is immaterial. Judge Shaw set aside the conviction for the larceny of the automobile upon the ground that the defendant had completed the service of that sentence before he applied for a post conviction hearing.

Judge Shaw has been careful to protect the defendant’s rights at all stages of this proceeding. The record discloses

No error.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000055373
<NAME> KENTUCKY POWER COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      710,888
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      8,064
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          70,179
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         9,129
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  90,698
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 888,958
<COMMON>                                        50,450
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      128,750
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             76,018
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 255,218
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           338,891
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 575
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  38,700
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    2,203
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     15,045
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                 3,854
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 234,472
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  888,958
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      129,870
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             2,802
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     114,977
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     117,779
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         12,091
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 (71)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  12,020
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         7,003
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,017
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                    5,017
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         7,075
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        3,509
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          10,462
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1> All common stock owned by parent company; no EPS required.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### SUSAN B. v. PLANAVSKY

No. 52P83.

Case below: 60 N.C. App. 77.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 March 1983.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIRCUIT RULE 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 CIRCUIT

RULE 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 9, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

))))))))))))))))))))))))))

No. 04-60236

))))))))))))))))))))))))))

AMERICAN GUARANTEE AND LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY

Plaintiff – Counter-Defendant – Appellee

vs.

AMERISTAR CASINOS INC; ET AL

Defendants

AMERISTAR CASINOS INC

Defendant – Counter-Claimant – Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

(00-CV-257)

Before GARWOOD, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After hearing oral argument and considering the parties’

briefs and pertinent portions of the record, we affirm the

district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of American

Guarantee.

AFFIRMED.
Case 1:06-cv-15149-AKH Document 13 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:06-cv-15149-AKH Document 13 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03495-SHS Document 11 Filed 11/21/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cr-00371-PKC Document 2 Filed 05/17/2007 Page 1 of 1