alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Northwest AirlinesCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Richard H. Anderson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operations of theCompany.

 
| /s/ Richard H. Anderson |
|-------------------------|
|                    |
| Richard H. Anderson     |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| August 9, 2002          |

 

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5643 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5643

  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
reauthorize the public safety and community policing grant program, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2014

Mr. Reed (for himself and Mr. McIntyre) introduced the following bill; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
reauthorize the public safety and community policing grant program, 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. REAUTHORIZATION OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMUNITY POLICING 
              GRANTS.

    Section 1101(a)(11) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3793(a)(11)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``2006 through 2009'' 
        and inserting ``2015 through 2019''; and
            (2) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
                    ``(B) Of funds available under part Q in any fiscal 
                year, not less than $30,000,000 shall be allocated for 
                grants pursuant to applications submitted by units of 
                local government or law enforcement agencies in order 
                to carry out the purpose described in section 
                1701(b)(12).''.
                                 <all>
```
Letter Amendment to Employment Agreement between SGS and R. Scott Murray



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
  
  

							
	 


	 		 		 	 20 William Street,
 Suite 310
 Wellesley, MA 02481
 781-304-1800 phone
 781-304-1701 fax
 www.stream.com


 May 6, 2009 
 Mr. R. Scott Murray 
 Stream Global Services, Inc. 
 20 William Street, Suite 310 
 Wellesley, MA 02481 
 Dear Scott: 
 Stream Global Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and you hereby agree to
amend the employment agreement dated as of July 15, 2008, as amended on December 29, 2008, by and between the Company and you (the “Agreement”), as follows: 
 The last sentence in Section 3.4 is deleted in its entirety and replaced by inserting at the end the following: 
 “Up to 40 hours of unused vacation time accrued by the Executive at the end of any fiscal year shall be carried over in full to the next year.” 
 Except as modified by this letter or by other intervening amendments, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This letter may be executed in counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which shall constitute one and the same document. 
 STREAM GLOBAL SERVICES,
INC. 
 By:  /s/    Sheila M.
Flaherty                         
         Sheila M. Flaherty 
         Chief Legal and Administrative Officer 
 Acknowledged and agreed: 
 /s/    R. Scott
Murray                                 
 R. Scott Murray 
 Date
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Be th Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 28, 2015

p0720 

# Order

Clerk July 28, 2015

150491(52)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 150491

COA: 318633

Wayne CC: 11

- 009674

- FC

PIERRE LAMAR TAYLOR,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s April 23,

2015 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because i t does not appear that the order was

entered erroneously.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-40107 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DAVID OLMEDO-PACHECO, also known as Richard Vela-Pacheco, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-03-CR-421-1

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, David OlmedoPacheco concedes that the arguments raised are foreclosed by circuit precedent but seeks to preserve them for further review. The Government has moved for summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. The motion is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D August 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
Exhibit 10 (f)

                           AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
                        INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT
                        NORTHERN EMPIRE BANCSHARES

Recital
-------

     This Amendment No. 1 to the Indemnification Agreement (the
"Agreement") dated February 16, 1993 between  William E. Geary,
("Indemnitee"), and Northern Empire Bancshares, a California corporation
(the "Company"), is made as of the 27th day of September, 2005, for the
purpose of clarifying Paragraph 7 of the Agreement regarding the laws
and/or regulations that limit the Company's ability to indemnify
Indemnitee.

Agreement
---------

     1.  Amendment to Paragraph 7 of Indemnification Agreement.
         ------------------------------------------------------

     Paragraph 7 of the Agreement is hereby amended by the addition of a
     new Subsection (b) to read in its entirety as follows:

     "(b) Applicable Law.  To indemnify Indemnitee for expenses,
         ----------------
     penalties or other payments, or for any other amounts, in violation
     of applicable banking laws or regulations including, but not limited
     to, Section 12 U.S.C. 1828(k) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act,
     the regulations of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
     thereunder, or the regulations of the Office of the Comptroller of
     the Currency, as now or hereafter in effect."

     2.  Renumbering of Subsections.
         ---------------------------

      Subsections (b), (c), (d) and (e) of Paragraph 7 of the Agreement are
      hereby renumbered as Subsections (c), (d), (e) and (f), respectively.

Authorized Signatures
---------------------

     In order to bind the parties to this Amendment No. 1 to this
     Agreement, their duly authorized representatives have signed their
     names below on the dates indicated.

Northern Empire Bancshares                         Date Executed:  9/27/05
                                                                  --------
By  /s/ Deborah A. Meekins
   -----------------------
Address:801 Fourth Street
        Santa Rosa, CA  95404


AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED:

INDEMNITEE    William E. Geary                  Date Executed: 9/27/05
                                                              ---------

Signature  /s/ William E. Geary
          ------------------------
Address:       824 McDonald Avenue
               Santa Rosa, CA 95404
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS
                                --------------

     I, Steve Bailey, certify that:

          1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on
               Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered
               by this report on Form 10-K of Alternative Loan Trust 2007-2CB
               (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

          2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken
               as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and
               other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for
               the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange
               Act periodic reports;

          4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
               servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance
               review(s) conducted in preparing the servicer compliance
               statement(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of
               Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
               periodic reports, the servicer(s) have fulfilled their
               obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material
               respects; and

          5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
               criteria for asset-backed securities and their related
               attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
               criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in
               this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
               Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an
               exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this
               report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in
               such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

          In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
          information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
          The Bank of New York, as Trustee, and Litton Loan Servicing LP.

          Date: March 26, 2008

               /s/ Steve Bailey
               --------------------------
               Steve Bailey
               Senior Managing Director, Chief Executive Officer Loan
               Administration
               (Senior officer in charge of the servicing function of
               Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP)
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5592 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5592

   To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to include 
 certain areas within the frontier and remote area levels designations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2014

   Ms. Gabbard (for herself and Mr. Young of Alaska) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to include 
 certain areas within the frontier and remote area levels designations.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFYING HRSA METHODOLOGY FOR DESIGNATION OF FRONTIER AND 
              REMOTE AREAS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in developing the 
methodology for the designation of frontier and remote areas published 
in the Federal Register on May 5, 2014 (79 Fed. Reg. 25599), the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services shall--
            (1) designate as a frontier area any area in Hawaii or 
        Alaska that is defined or designated as rural under the law of 
        the respective State for purposes of determining whether the 
        area qualifies as rural for a Federal program; and
            (2) include, in addition to the frontier and remote area 
        levels otherwise defined pursuant to such methodology, a level 
        (developed in accordance with a process established by the 
        Secretary) for areas that have unique characteristics (such as 
        being geographically isolated) that should qualify such areas 
        for such designation.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.1
       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;
andc.
    
    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.
  By:
    /s/ LEWIS W. DICKEY, JR.Lewis W. Dickey, Jr.
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

October 28, 2009 Session

CASSANDRA LYNN RUDD v. HOWARD THOMAS RUDD

Direct Appeal from the General Sessions Court for Hardin County

No. 6677 Daniel L. Smith, Judge 

No. W2009-00251-COA-R3-CV - Filed December 9, 2009

HOLLY M. KIRBY, J., CONCURRING SEPARATELY:

I concur in the Court’s decision but write separately to clarify my view of the evidence as it

relates to S.R. I believe that the evidence would support a finding by the trial court, by clear and

convincing evidence, that any visitation with Father would result in harm to S.R. However, because

the trial court did not make the required finding of harm, I agree with the decision to remand the case

on the issue of visitation.

Likewise, I believe that there is evidence in the record to support limiting Father’s statutory

parental rights as to S.R. to the extent that they involve contact with S.R., such as the statutory right

to participate in S.R.’s school activities, athletic activities, church activities, telephone calls with her,

and unopened mail. However, I agree with the Court’s decision to vacate the trial court’s decision

and remand on this issue, because the trial court made no findings on S.R.’s best interests.

In all other respect, I fully concur.

__________________________________________

HOLLY M. KIRBY, J.
EXHIBIT 35.3

                    SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)

                           HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC

                RFMSI SERIES 2007-S1 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized  officer of Homecomings  Financial,  LLC, as
servicer (the "Servicer") pursuant to the applicable  servicing agreement,  does
hereby certify that:

1. A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during the period from and including
January 30, 2007 through and including  September 24, 2007 and of the Servicer's
performance  under the  applicable  servicing  agreement  has been made under my
supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the applicable  servicing agreement in all material
respects  throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 24th
day of March 2008.


By:   /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
      Title: Managing Director
Exhibit 32.2

Certifications

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned officer of Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended April 1, 2006 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |     |  |                                                                   
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 15, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ BRYANT P. BYNUM                                               
|                      |  |     |  | Bryant P. BynumExecutive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 and is not being filed as
part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### Mary E. Y. Howe v. James Leyall and another.

Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-30-2000
<CASH>                                         27,279
<SECURITIES>                                   190,129
<RECEIVABLES>                                  250,737
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               468,145
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 468,145
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          131,400
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       12,100
<OTHER-SE>                                     324,645
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   468,145
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               132,177
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (132,177)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (132,177)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (132,177)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.01)



</TABLE>
#### VIRGINIA FARROW, by Her Next Friend, RANDOLPH FARROW, v. RICHARD WHITE and L. S. POWELL.

(Filed 3 November, 1937.)

Automobiles § 18h: Trial § 29b—

Where there is no allegation or evidence that defendant driver failed to give a warning signal required of him by the statute under the circumstances, it is error for the court to charge the law requiring the giving of such signal, since the court is required to charge the law arising upon the evidence, C. S., 564.

Appeal by defendants from *Sinclair, J.,*at May Term, 1937, of LeNOie. New trial.

*William A. Evans and Charles F, Bouse for plaintiff, appellee.*

*J. A. Jones for defendants, appellants.*

ScheNOK, J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries to the plaintiff alleged to have been proximately caused by the negligence of the defendants in striking the plaintiff with an automobile operated on a public highway while the plaintiff was a pedestrian thereon.

The complaint alleges that “the defendants were negligent in the operation of said car which caused the injuries to the plaintiff in the following respects: (a) That while traveling along State Highway No. 11 on a straight strip of said road and at a time when there was 'no other vehicular traffic thereupon, deliberately, or without any regard to the rights and safety of the general public, and particularly the plaintiff, Virginia Farrow, who was walking on said road at said time, operated their said automobile on the left-hand side thereof as they were proceeding and on the wrong side of said road as regards the defendants, and on the left-hand side of the center of said road as the plaintiff was walking, which was the proper and legal side for her to walk upon, and struck and injured the plaintiff as hereinbefore set forth.”

*377Tbe appellant assigns as error tbe following excerpt from tbe charge: “Here is tbe law in tbis State applied to driving upon tbe highway approaching pedestrians going in front of a car. Tbe law requires every person operating an automobile upon tbe public bigbway to use that degree of care that a reasonably careful person would use under like or similar circumstances to prevent injury or death to persons on or traveling over, upon or across such bigbway, and any person so operating an automobile when approaching a pedestrian who is upon tbe traveled part of tbe bigbway and not upon tbe sidewalk shall slow down and give timely signal with bis bell, born or other device for signaling, and tbe failure of such person so operating such motor vehicle so to do is negligence.”

Tbis assignment of error must be sustained since there is no allegation in tbe complaint and no evidence in tbe record that tbe defendants failed to give a timely signal with bell, born or other device for signaling. There is no mention in the complaint or in tbe evidence of any signal, or any failure to give a signal. Tbe judge “shall state in a plain and correct manner tbe evidence given in tbe case and declare and explain tbe law arising thereon.” C. S., 564.

For tbe error assigned tbe defendants are entitled to a new trial, and it is so ordered.

New trial.