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


CERTIFICATION




I, Daniel
Imperato, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Imperiali, 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(s) 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 report is being prepared;




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




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




5. The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 the 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.




Date:  December
      15, 2008
              /s/Daniel
      ImperatoDaniel
      ImperatoPrincipal
      Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet of Phillips Petroleum Company as of March 31,
1998, and the related consolidated statement of income for the three months
ended March 31, 1998, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             194
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,580
<ALLOWANCES>                                        18
<INVENTORY>                                        527
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,575
<PP&E>                                          21,742
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,569
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,964
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,264
<BONDS>                                          2,929
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              650
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           603
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,285
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,964
<SALES>                                          3,093
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,254
<CGS>                                            2,534<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,599<F2>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    13<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  46
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    452
<INCOME-TAX>                                       209
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                243
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       243
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .93
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .92
<FN>
<F1> Purchased crude oil and products + Production and operating expenses +
     Exploration expenses + Depreciation, depletion and amortization.
<F2> CGS + Taxes other than income taxes.
<F3> Preferred dividend requirements of capital trusts.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31(a)**
**RULE 13a – 14(a)/15d – 14(a) CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
I, Sherrill Stone, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Peerless Mfg. Co., certifythat:
1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Peerless Mfg. Co.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)  Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and proceduresto be designed under oursupervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating tothe registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during theperiod in which this report isbeing prepared;  (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation;and  (c)  Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reportingthat occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likelyto materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):
 (a)  All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the designor operation of internal controlover financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or otheremployees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internalcontrols over financial reporting.    /s/ Sherrill Stone Sherrill Stone Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer Date: February 14, 2005
Exhibit 10.14



 Exhibit 10.14 
  
 Description of Non-Employee Director Compensation 
  
 During 2004, each non-employee director of Markel Corporation (“Company”) received for services as director an annual fee of
$10,000, plus $1,250 for each regular or special director’s meeting attended and reimbursement of expenses incurred in connection with attending meetings. Directors also received a fee of $1,250 for each committee meeting attended on a day
other than a regularly scheduled board meeting. 
  
 Non-employee directors are
also eligible to participate, up to the total amount of fees received by the director, in the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase and Bonus Plan (“Stock Plan”). Under the Stock Plan, amounts specified by a director are withheld from
that director’s fees and forwarded to an independent administrator who purchases shares of the Company’s Common Stock on behalf of the director participant. In addition, the Company provides a “bonus” of 10% of the net increase
in shares purchased under the Stock Plan in a calendar year. 
  
 The Company also
offers loans to employees to facilitate the purchase of shares under the Stock Plan. Effective July 30, 2002, directors may no longer receive new loans under the Stock Plan, and existing loans will continue in accordance with their terms in effect
on that date. In connection with the “grandfathered” loans for directors, the Company provides an incentive payment based on a five-year compound annual growth in book value (“Company Incentive Payment”) as follows: 

 

					
	 5 year Compound Annual
 Growth in Book Value

	 	 	  	Company Incentive Payment
as % of Original Loan Balance


	 Under 15%
	 	 	  	     0%
	 15%
	 	 	  	1.25%
	 16%
	 	 	  	2.00%
	 17%
	 	 	  	2.75%
	 18%
	 	 	  	3.50%
	 19%
	 	 	  	4.25%
	 20%
	 	 	  	5.00%
	 21%
	 	 	  	5.75%
	 22%
	 	 	  	6.50%
	 23%
	 	 	  	7.25%
	 24%
	 	 	  	8.00%
	 25%
	 	 	  	8.75%
	 Over 25%
	 	 	  	Discretionary

  
 For these purposes, book value is
adjusted to exclude the benefits of issuing equity securities at prices above the preceding year-end book value per share and to exclude the goodwill amortization costs resulting from a transaction in which equity securities are issued. 

 
 Each non-employee director has also received a one-time award of 1,000 Restricted Stock
Units under the Company’s Omnibus Incentive Plan. Such awards vest ratably over a five-year period from the date of grant, although no shares will be issued until the end of five years.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 169 (Friday, August 29, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 50979]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20069]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1763-DR]


Iowa; Amendment No. 16 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Iowa (FEMA-1763-DR), dated May 27, 2008, and related 
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: August 12, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Iowa is hereby amended to include the following areas 
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the 
catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of May 27, 2008.

    Audubon and Winnebago Counties for Individual Assistance.
    Adair, Cass, Grundy, Guthrie, and Henry Counties for Individual 
Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance.)
    Cherokee County for Public Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-20069 Filed 8-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
----

**Exhibit 32.2**

****

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

****

In connection withthe Annual Report of Peptide Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2019 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Irene Getty, Chief Financial Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct 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 theSecurities 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   Company. |

 

| *By:*  | */s/ Irene Getty*                                     |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Irene Getty                                           |   |
|   | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) |   |
|   | January 23, 2020                                 |   |

----
#### Sadie Rosenberg, Plaintiff, *v.*Saratoga Springs Authority, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County,

November 2, 1955.

*E. & S. L. & E. Greenberg*for plaintiff.

*Galli & Locker*for defendant.

Philip M. Kleinfeld, J.

Plaintiff’s motion to strike defense that the court has no jurisdiction of the subject matter granted. Defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint on the same ground denied.

The complaint pleads a cause of action for breach of implied warranty of fitness for use pursuant to section 96 of the Personal Property Law. Defendant contends that this is an action “ sounding in tort ”. Section 1306-a of the Public Authorities Law grants to the Court of Claims exclusive jurisdiction of all actions against the defendant “ sounding in tort ”.

In considering a similar complaint for the purpose of determining which Statute of Limitations was applicable, the Court of Appeals held that while such an action ‘ ‘ may involve, incidentally, some showing of negligence, the contract breached is not merely one to use due care, but is a separate (implied) contract of guaranty ”. *(Blessington*v. *McCrory Stores*Corp., 305 N. Y. 140, 147.)

*Greco*v. *Kresge Co.*(277 N. Y. 26) cited by defendant, does not hold to the contrary. The Court of Appeals there determined that the breach of implied warranty of fitness for use was a “ wrongful act” within the provisions of section 130 of the Decedent Estate Law. The court said, ‘ ‘ Though the action may be brought solely for the breach of the implied warranty, the breach is a wrongful act, a default, and, in its essential nature, a tort”. In the sense of “ essential nature ” any breach of contract may be said to be tortious. Section 1306-a of the Public Authorities Law cannot be construed to include such breaches in the phrase *“*sounding in tort ”.

Settle order on notice.
The Board of Directors
Citicorp:

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated January 21,
1997 relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Citicorp and subsidiaries as
of December 31, 1996 and 1995, thre related consolidated statements of income,
changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 1996, and the related consolidated balance
sheets of Citibank, N.A. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, in
the Registration Statement on Form S-3, and to the reference to our firm under
the heading "Experts" in the Registration Statement. Out report with respect to
these consolidated financial statements, which contains an added explantaory
paragraph, is included in the 1995 Citicorp Annual Report and Form 10-K.


                                                       /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


July 22, 1997
181 La. 262.

#### STATE v. BARTON.

No. 33194.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 4, 1935.

McIntosh & Sims, of‘Oak Grove, for appellant.

G. L. Pórterie, Atty. Gen., James O’Connor, Asst. Atty. Gen., D. J. Anders, Dist. Atty., of Winnsboro, and'Léssley P. Gardinfer, Asst, to Atty. Gen., for the State.

FOURNET, Justice.

The defendant, Pete Barton, was indicted for holding up and robbing the filling station of Joe Tambnro in the town of Delhi, La., on the night of July 23, 1934. The robbery was committed about 9 or 9:30 o’clock p. m. On or about August 18, the defendant was arrested on the charge, furnished bail, and was out under bond from that date until the day of his arraignment and the fixing of his case for trial, which was on October 10. He was convicted of the offense, and filed a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence.

The defendant annexed to his motion for a new trial the affidavits of four parties, three of whom stated in the affidavit that they were across-thfe street-from where the offense took place and that, if a new trial were granted, they'would testify that defendant was not the party who held up the prosecuting witness.'' Thé fourth party in the affidavit states that, while he “was not looking in the direction,where the crime took place, he would testify, in the event a new trial was granted, that the other three alleged newly discovered witnesses were there. The trial judge overruled the motion on the ground that in his opinion the defendant had npt sufficiently shown that by the exercise of due diligence the purported newly discovered evidence could not -have been produced in the *384trial. In his per curiam, the trial judge fur-. ther states that he was familiar with the locus in quo and was of' the opinion that parties situated as the alleged new witnesses say they were, could not have been in a- position to have identified the robber, and refused a new trial. The defendant excepted to the ruling of the court and promptly reserved a bill of exception.

The jurisprudence of this state with reference to the granting of new trials on the ground of newly discovered evidence is to the effect that such applications are left largely to the discretion of the trial judge, and that his refusal to grant such motions will not be reversed unless manifestly erroneous. State v. Heintz, 174 La. 219, 140 So. 28; State v. Johnson, 160 La. 470, 107 So. 309; State v. Thomas, 127 La. 273, 53 So. 562; State v. Lee, 127 La. 265, 53 So. 559; State v. Folden, 135 La. 791, 66 So. 223.

There is nothing in the record which would justify us in taking issue with our learned brother below, particularly since this is a matter which is left largely to the discretion of the judge a quo. We cannot say that he has acted arbitrarily or abused the discretion the law vested in him, in refusing a new trial, and, consequently, the verdict of the jury and the sentence are affirmed.
**Exhibit 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT RESERVE ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS**     As independent reserve engineers, geologists, and geophysicists, we hereby consent to thereferences to our Firm’s name and our Firm’s reserve report dated January 29, 2009 on the oil andnatural gas reserves of Legacy Reserve LP as of December 31, 2007 in Legacy Reserves LP’s annualreport for the year ended December 31, 2007 filed on Form 10-Kand in Legacy Reserves LP’s registration statementson Form S‐8 (No. 333-144586) and on Form S-3 (No.333-149251) with the Securities and ExchangeCommission.LAROCHE PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS, LTD.     By: /s/ Joe A. Young   Name: Joe A. Young  Title: Senior Partner  March 14, 2008
#### Syed T. AHMAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NASSAU HEALTH CARE CORP., Anthony Angelo and Jacob Sokol, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-9406.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Aug. 14, 2003.

Alan E. Wolin, Wolin & Wolin, Jericho, N.Y., on Submission for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Amy L. Yetry, Nixon Peabody, LLP, Garden City, N.Y., on Submission for Defendants-Appellees.

PRESENT: JACOBS, SOTOMAYOR, Circuit Judges.*

*

 The Honorable Fred I. Parker, who was a member of the panel, died following argument, and the appeal is being decided by the remaining members of the panel, who are in agreement. *See*Local Rule § 0.14(b).

*SUMMARY ORDER*

Syed Ahmad appeals from a final judgment in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Platt, *J.)*granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on all claims. We affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court. *See Ahmad v. Nassau Health Care Corp.,*234 F.Supp.2d 185 (E.D.N.Y.2002).
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

     In connection  with the Annual Report of LILM, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, George I. Norman, III,
Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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 result of operations of the
     Company.


/s/   GEORGE I. NORMAN, III
---------------------------------------
George I. Norman, III
Principal Accounting Officer
April 17, 2007



     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906, or
     other document  authenticating,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the
     signature that appears in typed form within the electronic  version of this
     written  statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
     the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its
     staff upon  request.  The foregoing  certifications  are  accompanying  the
     Company's Form 10-KSB solely pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
     Act of 2002  (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,  chapter 63 of title
     18,  United  States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-KSB
     or as a separate disclosure document.