alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### A. B. McDavid v. Frank Sutton.

1, *Freeholds—Test to Determine Whether One is*Involved.—The test as to whether or not a freehold is involved is to determine whether, as a result of the execution of the judgment or decree, one of the parties gains or loses a freehold estate.

Bill to Compel a Conveyance of land.-—Error to the Circuit Court of Moultrie County; the Hon. William G. Cochran, Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the - May term, 1903.

Dismissed.

Opinion filed November 1, 1902.

Raymond D. Meeker and Mills Bros., attorneys for plaintiff in error.

*627R. M. Peadro, attorney for defendant in error.

Mr. Presiding Justice Wright

delivered the opinion of the court.

By the decree in this case plaintiff in error, upon conditions with which defendant in error is willing to comply, is ordered to convey to the latter a freehold estate. Upon refusal of plaintiff in error to accept payment to him of $100.81, the master in chancery is directed to make such conveyance. By the execution of the decree defendant in error gains and plaintiff in error loses a freehold estate, and this is the test by which it is determined whether a freehold is directly involved. C., B. & Q. R. R. Co. v. Watson, 105 Ill. 217. Plaintiff in error being unwilling to comply with the terms of the decree by which he would be deprived of a freehold estate, seeks by the writ of error in this case to have this court reverse it, and the defendant in error has moved the court to dismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction, because a freehold is involved. A freehold is, in our opinion, directly involved, and the motion to dismiss the writ of error will therefore be sustained.

The writ of error will therefore be dismissed for the want of jurisdiction of this court, with leave to the respective parties to withdraw the record, abstracts and briefs, if they so desire.

Writ of error dismissed.
Exhibit 13.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of WNS
(Holdings) Limited (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the accompanying annual report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended March 31, 2014 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: May 14, 2014



|       |  |                              
|------ |  | -----------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Keshav R. Murugesh       
|Name:  |  | Keshav R. Murugesh           
|Title: |  | Group Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is
not being filed either as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure statement, and is not to be incorporated by reference into the Report or any other filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless
of any general incorporation language in such filing. The foregoing certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liabilities of
Section 18 or Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 15





November 10, 2000


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated October 16, 2000 on our review of interim
financial information of Phelps Dodge Corporation (the "Corporation") as of and
for the period ended September 30, 2000 and included in the Corporation's
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then ended is incorporated by
reference in its Registration Statement and Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 on
Form S-3 (Nos. 33-44380 and 333-36415), Post-Effective Amendment No. 2 on Form
S-3 (No. 33-44380), Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-26442, 33-6141,
33-26443, 33-29144, 33-19012, 2-67317, 33-34363, 33-34362, 33-62648, 333-42231,
and 333-52175), Post-Effective Amendment No. 4 on Form S-8 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-4 (No. 333-86061) and Registration Statement on Form S-3
(333-43890).


Very truly yours,

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
EX-35 (f)


[LOGO] WELLS FARGO


Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2630-011
7080 Samuel Morse Drive
Columbia, MD 21046
410 884-2000


Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.


October 31, 2007


Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Sec Inc.
383 Madison Ave
New York, NY 10179

Attn: Christopher Hoeffel

RE: Annual Statement As To Compliance for Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage
Securities Trust 2006-TOP22

Per Section 13.9 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of 04/01/2006,
the undersigned Officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., (Paying Agent), hereby
certifies the following for the 2006 calendar year or portion thereof:

(A)   a review of such Certifying Servicer's activities during the preceding
      calendar year or portion thereof and of such Certifying Servicer's
      performance under this Agreement, or the applicable sub-servicing
      agreement or primary servicing agreement in the case of an Additional
      Servicer, has been made under such officer's supervision and


(B)   to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such
      Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under this
      Agreement, or the applicable sub-servicing agreement or primary servicing
      agreement in the case of an Additional Servicer, in all material respects
      throughout such year or portion thereof.

Certified By:
/s/ Judy Rishel
Judy Rishel
Vice President


Certified By:
/s/ Gordon Johnson
Gordon Johnson, Assistant Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          26,312
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,136
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    487,841
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,002
<PP&E>                                       2,637,825
<DEPRECIATION>                                 943,229
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,240,887
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          845,762
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       354,777
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,040,348
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,240,887
<SALES>                                        420,209
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               420,209
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               436,447
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,048
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (30,959)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (31,759)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (31,759)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 Paradise, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack M. Laskowitz, as Chief Financial Officer of
Paradise, Inc., 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:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of Paradise, Inc.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                      |  |  |  |                        
|------------------------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Jack M. Laskowitz                 |  |  |  | Date: November 14, 2008
|Jack M. Laskowitz                     |  |  |  |                        
|Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |  |  |  |
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilardo BUSTAMANTE-OLAGUE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-50128.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 20, 2003.

Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.*

Gilardo Bustamante-Olague appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Bustamante contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) define separate offenses. He argues that the prior conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should have been alleged in his indictment. Bustamante maintains that he pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for that offense.

In *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. *Id.*at 239-47, 118 S.Ct. 1219. Bustamante acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres,*but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review.

*Apprendi*did not overrule *Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi*530 U.S. at 489-90, 120 S.Ct. 2348; *United States v. Dabeit,*231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000). This court must follow *Almendarez-Torres*“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” *Dabeit,*231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.

*

 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.
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  1.
    
    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007
(the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
  /s/ W. Kirk Brassfield

W. Kirk Brassfield
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
  41
Exhibit 10.57 Description of 2008 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan The Compensation Committee  of the Board of Directors of Remington Arms Company, Inc. (the Company) approved the 2008 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan (the 2008 Plan) on February 5, 2008. The 2008 Plan is a cash bonus plan  in which the Companys named executive officers and certain other employees are eligible to participate. Under the 2008 Plan, participants are generally entitled to receive a cash bonus if the Companys Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), as adjusted for certain non-recurring or unusual transactions, exceeds certain target thresholds for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008.  Each participant is generally entitled to receive 50% of his target bonus of Adjusted EBITDA beginning at 90% of the Adjusted EBITDA threshold up to a maximum of 150% of his target bonus at 110% of Adjusted EBITDA.    148
EXHIBIT 32.2


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


     I,  Mitchell  Binder, Chief Financial Officer of Orbit International Corp.,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.   1350, as enacted by  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act  of  2002,  that:
(1)     the  Quarterly  Report  on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June
30, 2010 (the "Periodic Report") which this statement accompanies fully complies
with  the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of  1934;  and
(2)     information  contained  in  the  Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial condition and results of operations of Orbit
International  Corp.

Dated: August 16, 2010
                                   /s/ Mitchell Binder
                                   -------------------
                                   Mitchell Binder
                                   Chief Financial Officer
#### Gwendolyn H. JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald RUMSFELD, Secretary, U.S. Department of Defense, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 02-1643.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 7, 2002.

Decided Nov. 13, 2002.

Gwendolyn H. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Parker, Rachel Celia Ballow, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAM D. WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*140PER CURIAM.

Gwendolyn H. Johnson filed a notice of appeal in her civil action, which remains pending in the district court. Johnson states that she seeks to appeal a district court order entered on June 7, 2002, but there is no such order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the order Johnson seeks to appeal does not exist and because there is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
EX-35 (h)
PHH Mortgage
(logo) PHH
4001 Leadenhall Road
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054


March 7, 2007

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA
Servicer Oversight Group, Yvonne Williams
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045


Re:     Servicer Compliance Statement

Deal Name: JPALT 2006-A2

Dear Sir and/or Madame:

This statement of compliance is being provided in accordance with Item 1123 of
Regulation AB. The Undersigned hereby states that:

1.      I am an authorized officer of PHH Mortgage Corporation (the "Servicer");

2.      A review of the Servicer's activities during the period from 04/01/2006
        (the "Reporting Period") and its performance under the Agreement has
        been made under my supervision; and

3.      To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, except as described
        in section 3(a) hereto, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its
        obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the
        Reporting Period.

        a. The Servicer did not maintain or provide one of the required monthly
        reports, specifically the S5L2 Fidelity report, as stated in the
        transaction agreement(s) for the Reporting period shown in section 2 of
        this statement.


By: /s/ Deborah A. Rocchi
Name: Deborah A. Rocchi
Title: Assistant Vice President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 27

        THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
        STATEMENTS OF INCOME, CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, AND CONSOLIDATED
        STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS, AND QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
        SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000077385
<NAME>  PEOPLES ENERGY CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                            PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                  1,476,585
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                   93,355
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                       429,637
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                      22,298
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                58,316
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             2,080,191
<COMMON>                                     296,653
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                          0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          502,689
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               799,342
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         521,734
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                          0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                59,855
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                          0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                        0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                   0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               699,260
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>              2,080,191
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    814,245
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   662,510
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   662,510
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                      151,735
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                            14,764
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>               166,499
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      20,628
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                          56,418
<NET-INCOME>                                  89,453
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                 89,453
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      34,024
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                     17,713
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                       147,098
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   2.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   2.52

        

</TABLE>
#### ALLARDYCE v. ABRAHAM et al.*

No. 1799.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

March 9, 1938.

For former opinion, see 178 So. 170.

Bass & Patin, of Lake Charles, for appellant.

Griffin T. Hawkins, of Lake Charles, for appellee.

*

 Writ of certiorari granted by Supreme Court May 2, 1938.

PER CURIAM.

In this cause, pending an application for rehearing filed on behalf of the intervener, appellant herein, this court’s attention was called to the fact that while we had the case under advisement, and prior to the date on which judgment was rendered affirming the judgment of the lower court, the plaintiff, appellee, Mrs. J. D. Allardyce, had died, and that .since the rendition of the judgment by this court, her husband, John D. Allardyce, had been appointed and had qualified as administrator of her succession.

Through the same counsel who had represented his deceased wife, her husband, now the administrator of her succession, joined in the motion for a rehearing, but asked that the same be limited to the one point of substituting him 'in his capacity as administrator, as party plaintiff, appellee herein.

Due proof of the appointment of John D. Allardyce as the administrator of the succession of his deceased wife, and that he has qualified as such having been made, it becomes necessary that the former judgment and decree of this court herein handed down on January 11, 1938, be annulled and set aside, and that proper judgment be rendered in favor of the party plaintiff, appellee now before the court.

For these reasons, it is now ordered that a rehearing be granted in this case; the same to be restricted, however, to the making of the proper party appellee herein.

*318It is further ordered that John D. Al-lardy'ce, administrator of the succession of Mrs. J. D. Allardyce, be, and he is hereby, substituted and made party plaintiff, appellee herein in place of Mrs. J. D. Allardyce, deceased, and with him as party thus designated, it is now ordered that our former judgment and decree as herein handed down on January 11, 1938, be reinstated and made the final judgment of this court.

The application for rehearing filed on behalf of .the intervener, appellant herein, is denied, and rehearing refused.