alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.1

WRITTEN STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350

                    The undersigned, James M. McNamee, the Chief Executive Officer, and FredLash, the Chief Financial Officer, of Hooper Holmes,  Inc. (the “Company”), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, each hereby certifies that:

|  
                    (i)     the Quarterly Report on Form10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2002 of the Company (the “Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated:  November 13, 2002

 
  
 
/s/ JAMES M. McNAMEE

 
 
**James M. McNamee Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer**

 
 
 
 
 
/s/ FRED LASH

 
 
**Fred Lash Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer**

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.73


                                   [SMS LOGO]




February 23, 2001

Mr. John Bruno
Senior Vice President
Cagles, Inc.
2000 Hills Avenue, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30318

RE:  Popeyes' 8-Piece Cost-plus Contract Extension

Dear John:

This letter is to confirm that Cagles and Supply Management Services, Inc. have
agreed to extend the Popeyes 8-Piece Cost-Plus Contract from the current
expiration date of October 4, 2001 to March 31, 2004.  This will coincide with
the expiration date of the Churchs Cost-Plus Agreement.  The letter will be
added as an attachment to the original October 5, 1998 Popeyes Contract.

Thanks for your consideration.



 /s/  Jeff Spotz
----------------------------
Jeff Spotz                              Acknowledged and agreed this 23rd day of
President                               February, 2001

cc:  Dan Cheatham                       Cagles, Inc.

                                        By:  /s/ John Bruno
                                           -------------------------------

                                        Title:  Sr. V.P.
                                              ----------------------------




                          [SMS ADDRESS/TELEPHONE/FAX]
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A1772. ROBERT SHARPE v. THE STATE.

In 2007, Robert Sharpe pled guilty to false imprisonment and other crimes and

was given a partially probated sentence. In 2019, the trial court revoked Sharpe’s

probation after he admitted that he had failed to report to his probation supervisor and

had committed three new criminal offenses. The courtsentenced Sharpe to serve five

years in custody. Sharpe filed a motion to reduce or modify this sentence, which the

trial court denied. Sharpe then filed this direct appeal, but we lack jurisdiction.

“In determining the proper procedure to follow in pursuing an appeal, the

underlying subject matter generally controls over the relief sought.” Self v. Bayneum,

265 Ga. 14, 14-15 (453 SE2d 27) (1995). Because the underlying subject matter of

this appeal is the revocation of Sharpe’s probation, he was required to file an

application for discretionary appeal in order to appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (5),

(b); Todd v. State, 236 Ga. App. 757, 758 (513 SE2d 287) (1999); White v. State, 233

Ga. App. 873, 874 (505 SE2d 228) (1998). His failure to do so deprives this Court of

jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

May 08, 2020

05/08/2020
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-19-00225-CV

IN RE Abelardo G. GONZALEZ

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 1, 2019

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED AS MOOT

In this original proceeding, relator complains the district clerk and court reporter have 

refused to prepare and file the records in his pending appeal before this court in appellate cause 

number 04-18-00833-CV. On April 17, 2019, in appellate cause number 04-18-00833-CV, this 

court ordered the clerk’s record and reporter’s record filed within thirty days. Because relator has 

received the relief requested, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus as moot.

PER CURIAM

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2017 FLI 001815 C3, styled In the Interest of M.A.G. and Z.A.G., Children, 

pending in the County Court at Law No. 2, Webb County, Texas, the Honorable Missy Medary presiding.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2024 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2024

  To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for an additional 
           place of holding court in the District of Oregon.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 2, 2000

    Mr. Smith of Oregon (for himself and Mr. Wyden) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for an additional 
           place of holding court in the District of Oregon.

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

SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL PLACE OF HOLDING COURT IN THE DISTRICT OF OREGON.

    Section 117 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking 
``Pendleton and Portland'' and inserting ``Pendleton, Portland, and 
Springfield''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-8176

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

MUJADDID RAHIM MUHAMMAD, f/k/a Stacey Lamar Marsh, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, 

District Judge. (3:91-cr-00114-2) 

Submitted: May 28, 2009 Decided: June 3, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Mujaddid Rahim Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se. John J. Frail, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Mujaddid Rahim Muhammad appeals the district court’s 

order granting his motion to reduce his sentence filed pursuant 

to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006), and the order denying 

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. United States v. Muhammad, No. 3:91-cr00114-2 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 28, 2008; Sept. 24, 2008); see United 

States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247 (4th Cir. 2009), petition for 

cert. filed, 77 U.S.L.W. 3559 (U.S. Mar. 20, 2009) (No. 

08-1185). 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
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 190

To amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the

Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total

to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same

extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel

on such aircraft.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 19, 1999

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former

members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as

retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to

travel on such aircraft.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 190 IS

1 SECTION 1. TRAVEL ON MILITARY AIRCRAFT OF CERTAIN

2 DISABLED FORMER MEMBERS OF THE

3 ARMED FORCES.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 53 of title 10, United

5 States Code, is amended by adding after section 1060a

6 the following new section:

7 ‘‘§ 1060b. Travel on military aircraft: certain disabled

8 former members of the armed forces

9 ‘‘The Secretary of Defense shall permit any former

10 member of the armed forces who is entitled to compensa11 tion under the laws administered by the Secretary of Vet12 erans Affairs for a service-connected disability rated as

13 total to travel, in the same manner and to the same extent

14 as retired members of the armed forces, on unscheduled

15 military flights within the continental United States and

16 on scheduled overseas flights operated by the Military Air17 lift Command. The Secretary of Defense shall permit such

18 travel on a space-available basis.’’.

19 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

20 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding

21 after the item relating to section 1060a the following new

22 item:

‘‘1060b. Travel on military aircraft: certain disabled former members of the

armed forces.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 31.1


I, Stephen A. Romano, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American Ecology
Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers 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 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 quarterly 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 quarterly report based on such evaluation; and
c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant's internal
control 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 control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers 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.

August 3, 2004

/S/ Stephen A. Romano
_______________________
 Chief Executive Officer


                                       32
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT
32.1                                                                                                            CERTIFICATIONS







CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT
TO




18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350




AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002









I, Roy H.
Bubbs, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly
Report of Hooper Holmes, Inc., on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Hooper Holmes,
Inc.




Dated:  November 7,
2008









/s/ Roy H. Bubbs




__________________________




Roy H.
Bubbs




Chief
Executive Officer and President




This
certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the
liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not be
deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act
of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically
incorporates it by reference.




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Hooper Holmes, Inc. and will be retained by Hooper Holmes, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 on Form 10-K of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust II (the "Trust") and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding II, L.P. for
the period ended December 26, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Linda L. Lowry, Regular Trustee
of the Trust, 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 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 Trust.





                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST II


                              By:  /s/ LINDA L. LOWRY
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Linda L. Lowry *
                              Title:   Regular Trustee









Dated: March 22, 2004
_____________________

* Linda L. Lowry functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Trust for  purposes  of Section  906
  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
#### Samuel Wexler, Respondent, *v.*National Ben Franklin Insurance Company and Another, Appellants.*

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

July 1, 1936.

*John L. Fletcher,*for the appellant.

*Norman S. Rein,*for the respondent.

*

 Revg. 156 Misc. 755.

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff’s property was directly and specifically insured by the Camden Fire Insurance Association policy. The evidence established that neither the named insured nor plaintiff *283regarded plaintiff’s property damaged by the fire as covered by defendant’s policies. The acts of the parties after the fire did not amount to an adoption of the insurance under defendants’ policies, for plaintiff’s benefit and plaintiff did not comply with the conditions required therein for notice and proof of claim. The National Ben Franklin Insurance Company policy was clearly for the benefit of the named insured, indemnifying him against direct loss, and also his legal liability, if any, to others. The clause in Great American Insurance Company policy, “ loss, if any, to be adjusted with and payable to Pearl Co. etc.” was designed to have similar effect.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and complaint dismissed on the merits, with costs.

Hammer and Callahan, JJ., concur; Levy, J., dissents.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2059 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2059

   To modify land conveyance authority relating to the former Naval 
  Training Center, Bainbridge, Cecil County, Maryland, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 10, 2000

 Mr. Sarbanes introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To modify land conveyance authority relating to the former Naval 
  Training Center, Bainbridge, Cecil County, Maryland, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF LAND CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY, FORMER NAVAL 
              TRAINING CENTER, BAINBRIDGE, CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND.

    Section 1 of Public Law 99-596 (100 Stat. 3349) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``subsections (b) 
        through (f)'' and inserting ``subsections (b) through (e)'';
            (2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following 
        new subsection (b):
    ``(b) Consideration.--(1) In the event of the transfer of the 
property under subsection (a) to the State of Maryland, the transfer 
shall be with consideration or without consideration from the State of 
Maryland, at the election of the Secretary.
    ``(2) If the Secretary elects to receive consideration from the 
State of Maryland under paragraph (1), the Secretary may reduce the 
amount of consideration to be received from the State of Maryland under 
that paragraph by an amount equal to the cost, estimated as of the time 
of the transfer of the property under this section, of the restoration 
of the historic buildings on the property. The total amount of the 
reduction of consideration under this paragraph may not exceed 
$500,000.'';
            (3) by striking subsection (d); and
            (4) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections 
        (d) and (e), respectively.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT
      10.2**




**FIRST
      AMENDMENT TO B&D FOOD CORPORATION PREFERRED SHARE SUBSCRIPTION
      AGREEMENT**




THIS
      FIRST AMENDMENT TO SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made as of
      November 19, 2008, by and among B&D Food Corporation, a corporation
      organized under the laws of Delaware ("BDFC"), and Daniel Ollech, Jacques
      Ollech and Mark Radom, each an individual residing in Israel (the "Purchasers").




**Whereas** ,
      the
      parties hereto entered into a subscription agreement (the “Original Agreement”)
      relating to the Series A Preferred Shares ( *defined
      below* ) ** on
      September 28, 2008 in order to convert the outstanding principal and interest
      owing in respect of a $10,000,000 pursuant to a promissory note dated July
      8,
      2005, as amended by the amendment to the promissory note dated May 7, 2007
      and a
      second amendment to the promissory note dated September 28, 2008 (the “Note”),
      as well as certain management fees owed to Daniel and Jacques Ollech into equity
      in BDFC;




**Whereas** ,
      the
      parties to the Original Agreement erroneously indicated the number of Series
      A
      Preferred Shares referenced therein as 373,595,592 and now wish to correct
      this
      mistake by indicating the correct number of shares;




**Now,
      therefore** ,
      in
      consideration of the mutual premises and covenants contained herein, and
      intending to be legally bound, the parties hereto agree as follows:




1.
      Section 1.1 of the Original Agreement shall be hereby amended by replacing
      “373,595,592” with “3,735,956”. Section 1.2 of the Original Agreement shall be
      amended by adding at the end of this section the text “and Daniel Ollech and
      Jacques Ollech releasing their claim for certain management fees promised to
      them by BDFC (the Series A Preferred Shares corresponding to such management
      fees being 992,067 Series A Preferred Shares).” The second bullet point in
      Section 1.3 shall hereby be amended by replacing “one” with “ten”. These
      amendments shall be effective as of September 28, 2008.




2.
      All
      other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement remain in full force and
      effect.




3. Governing
      Law and Jurisdiction .
      This
      Agreement shall be governed by, and be construed in accordance with, the laws
      of
      the State of New York (without giving effect to the conflicts of laws
      provisions thereof). The parties agree that any disputes arising hereunder
      shall
      be submitted to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of
      New
      York.




IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and
      year
      first above written.




**B&D
      Food Corporation**





**Daniel
      Ollech**








**Jacques
      Ollech**









**Mark
      Radom**