alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, R. Scot Sellers, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Archstone-Smith Operating Trust (the“registrant”).2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis 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 presentedin this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared; b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles. c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. 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 and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of trustees (or persons performing the equivalentfunction); a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.BY:   /s/ R. SCOT SELLERS
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of - )

)

Northrop Grumman Corporation ) ASBCA No. 61337

)

Under Contract No. F19628-00-C-0100 et al. )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Stephen J. McBrady, Esq.

Charles Baek, Esq.

 Crowell & Moring LLP

 Washington, DC

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Arthur M. Taylor, Esq.

 DCMA Chief Trial Attorney

Srikanti Schaffner, Esq.

 Trial Attorney

 Defense Contract Management Agency

 Carson, CA

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: June 15, 2020

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61337, Appeal of Northrop 

Grumman Corporation, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: June 16, 2020

JOHN J. THRASHER

Administrative Judge

Chairman

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
#### COHEN v. COHEN et al.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Feb. 9, 1954.

Wm. J. Pruitt, Miami, for appellant.

Ross & Reinhardt, Miami, for appellees.

MATHEWS, Justice.

In this cause the appellant was granted a divorce and at the same time a property settlement which was fully.set forth in a stipulation embodied in the final decree entered on the 25th day of September, 1952. Appellant was represented by a reputable attorney in that proceeding.

This suit was filed on June 1, 1953, for an accounting and other relief against the former husband, claiming that there was not a full disclosure in the first suit and that the ex-husband perpetrated a fraud upon her. ■ Motion to dismiss was filed on *363the ground that all matters and things set forth in the second suit are res adjudicata. The same Chancellor who heard the first suit also heard the second suit and granted the motion to dismiss the bill of complaint.

The entire file of the first suit was before the Chancellor at the time of the argument on motion to dismiss the second suit. The order on the motion to dismiss the second suit contained the following:

> «* * *^*"phe allegations contained therein are res adjudicata, and have been decided and settled in the previous action, and that all matters and things contained in said bill of complaint have been adjudicated in the prior suit filed by the same plaintiff against the same defendants in Chancery Case No. 148651 in the Circuit Court. * * *”

In this suit the entire record considered by the Chancellor was not brought to this Court on appeal. In other words, the finding of the lower Court was based upon the transcript of record in the first suit and such transcript of record has not been brought before this .Court. It is well settled that where the findings of the lower Court were based upon evidentiary matters or a record which is not included in the transcript on appeal, it is impossible for this Court to review the orders of the lower Court. Grantham v. Grantham, 140 Fla. 120, 191 So. 197; Shea v. Carlton, 116 Fla. 507, 156 So. 495.

It is proper that the defense of res adjudicata be raised by motion where the facts supporting such motion appear from the bill of complaint. Keen v. Brown, 46 Fla. 487, 35 So. 401.

The order of the Chancellor dismissing the bill of complaint in this cause is presumed to be correct and no reversible error has been shown.

Affirmed.

ROBERTS, C. J., and TERRELL and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
May 24, 2016

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

LEIROI MICKELE DANIELS, Appellant

NO. 14-15-00111-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 32.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*


In connection with the Quarterly Report of PGI Incorporated (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Laurence A.
Schiffer, Chief Financial Officer 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:


(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 Company.



/s/ Laurence A. Schiffer
---------------------------------------------------------
    Laurence A. Schiffer
    Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)


                                                                  May 15, 2009

<FN>
*A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company
 and will be retained by the Company and will be furnished to the Securities
 and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  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 Pinnacle Gas Resources, Inc. (the "Company") for the
period ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald T. Barnes, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Secretary of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Company.

/s/ RONALD T. BARNES Ronald T. Barnes Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Secretary


Date:
April 15, 2009

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Annual Report of Cannabis Sativa, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Donald J. Lundbom, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Company.  Dated: April 4, 2018/s/ Donald J. LundbomDonald J. LundbomChief Financial Officer
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6917 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, Illinois, as the ‘‘Ryan 

J. Cummings Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 3, 2022 

Mr. CASTEN (for himself, Mr. RUSH, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, Ms. NEWMAN, 

Mr. GARCI ́A of Illinois, Mr. QUIGLEY, Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois, 

Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCHNEIDER, Mr. FOSTER, Mr. BOST, Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. UNDERWOOD, Mrs. 

MILLER of Illinois, Mr. KINZINGER, Mrs. BUSTOS, and Mr. LAHOOD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, 

Illinois, as the ‘‘Ryan J. Cummings Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RYAN J. CUMMINGS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 301 East Congress Parkway in 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6917 IH

1 Crystal Lake, Illinois, shall be known and designated as 

2 the ‘‘Ryan J. Cummings Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Ryan J. Cummings 

7 Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Buffington S. MAYER, Jr. v. Joseph H. SLAUGHTER et al.

No. 3091.

Court of Appeals of Louisiana. First Circuit.

March 7, 1949.

Benj. W. Miller and A. J. Jones, both of Bogalusa, for appellants.

Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Fuller, of Baton' Eouge, for appellees.

DORE, Judge..

For the reasons assigned in the consolidated cases of Hartman v. Mayer, et al., and Mayer v. Slaughter et al., La.App., 39 So.2d 166, it is ordered that the judgment in the above, numbered and entitled cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.
| (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is herebymade to that certain Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of August 1, 2018, by and among CREDIT SUISSECOMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONALASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Adminstrator, WILMINGTONTRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, asOperating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer with respect to CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-Cx12 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 of this Agreement, I, Leslie Hayton, ManagingDirector of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.           Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from August1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and 

 

2.           To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilledall of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary 2019.

 

 

/s/ Leslie Hayton

LeslieHayton

ManagingDirector              

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
210 La. 808

#### STATE v. OWENS.

No. 38240.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 12, 1946.

J. S. Pickett, of Many, for defendant-appellant.

Fred S. LeBlanc, Atty. Gen., M. E. Cul-ligan, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Edwin M. Fraser, Dist. Atty., of Many, for plaintiff-appellee.

FOURNET, Justice.

The defendant, Rufus Owens, reserved several bills of exceptions during the course of his trial, but having failed to present them to the trial judge for his signature and action prior to his appeal, there are no valid bills before this court and, consequently, nothing for us to review since there are no errors patent on the face of the record. See Articles 499, 542, and 545 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; State v. Snowden, 174 La. 156, 140 So. 9; State v. Early, 183 La. 664, 164 So. 620.

The contention that “since there is no State Statute prohibiting the keeping of intoxicating liquors for sale and the indictment does not allege the violation of an ordinance * * * the indictment is fatally defective,” and there is, therefore, an error patent on the face of the record, is without merit. A mere reading of the indictment will show that the defendant was not charged or prosecuted under an ordinance of the police jury, but, instead, under Act No. 15 of 1934, Section 13 of which provides that “Whoever shall sell or keep for sale any intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes, in any parish, locality, ward, city, town or village of this State, where the sale of intoxicating liquors is prohibited by law or ordinance shall, on conviction,, be punished by fine * * * or imprisonment * * See State v. Schimpf, 203 La. 839, 14 So.2d 677; State v. Monsour, 205 La. 272, 17 So.2d 307.

The conviction and sentence are affirmed.
**EXHIBIT  32**

**Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18****of the United States Code**

I, E. James Ferland, Chief Executive Officer of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Quarterly Report of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the “Periodic 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 the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated.

 

|   |   |   |                                                                                              |
|--------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        |   |   | /s/ E. James Ferland                                                                              |
|   |   |   |                                                                                                   |
|   |   |   | E. James FerlandPublic Service Enterprise Group IncorporatedChief Executive OfficerAugust 1, 2003 |

 

----
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |  |  |  |  |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Greenlane Holdings, Inc.; and                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
| 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. |

|                          |                               |  |  |  |  |
|--------------------------|-------------------------------|--|--|--|--|
| Date: April 29, 2022 | /s/ WILLIAM MOTE      |
|                          | William Mote                  |
|                          | Chief Financial Officer       |
|                          | (Principal Financial Officer) |
#### The State, ex rel. Eastman, *v.*Stuart et al., Judges of Common Pleas Court.*

(No. 24124

Decided September 20, 1933.)

*Messrs. Cow cm, Adams & Adams, Messrs. Fraser, Tliett, Wall & Effler, Mr. John W. Hackett*and *Messrs. Smith, Baker, Effler <3 Eastman,*for relator. - *Mr. Frazier Reams, Mr. J. S. Rhinefort*and *Mr. Arnold F. Bunge,*for respondents.

*

 Reporter's Note: For decision upon demurrer to petition, see 126 Ohio St., 644.

This canse came on to be heard upon the motion of respondents to strike the amended petition from the files, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged that said motion be, and the same hereby is, sustained; and said relator not desiring to plead further, it is therefore ordered and adjudged that the writ of prohibition prayed for be, and the same hereby is, denied on authority of *Silliman*v. *Court of Common Pleas of Williams County,*126 Ohio St., 338.

*Writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Allen, Stephenson, Bevis and Jones, JJ., concur.

Matthias, J., not participating.
<PAGE>


                                                                  Exhibit 32.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*


In connection with the Quarterly Report of PGI Incorporated (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Laurence A.
Schiffer, Chief Financial Officer 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:


(1)    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
       15(d), as applicable, 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 Company.



/s/ Laurence A. Schiffer
----------------------------------------------------
    Laurence A. Schiffer
    Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)       May 13, 2010


*A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company
 and will be retained by the Company and will be furnished to the Securities
 and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.