alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 asAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Serologicals Corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended April 2, 2006 (the “Report”) as filed on the date hereof with theSecurities and Exchange Commission fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:May 12, 2006

 

 
|   | /s/  HAROLD W. INGALLS                                |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Harold  W. Ingalls                                    |
|   | Vice  President, Finance and  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 17, 2009*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.10 Assets and Liabilities of the Personal Sector1** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### Hubert CUSHMAN, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 46634.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 11, 1973.

Rehearing Denied May 1, 1973.

Frank P. Dove, Panhandle, James M. Bowers, Pampa, for appellant.

John M. Deavers, II, Dist. Atty., Memphis, Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., and Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

ROBERTS, Judge.

The conviction is for robbery by firearms ; punishment was assessed at 30 years’ confinement.

The State has improperly filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellant escaped from the Carson County jail on January 16, 1973 and was recaptured that same day. The record on appeal had not been filed in this Court prior to appellant’s return to custody of the sheriff following his escape. Since we do not have the authority to grant the State’s motion to dismiss, we overrule the same. See McGee v. State, 445 S.W.2d 187 (Tex.Crim.App.1969).

As best we are able to ascertain, appellant raises two grounds of error. He alleges that since the State chose not to seek the death penalty, they should not have made certain statements during argument. Though we are not referred to any portion of the record, apparently, appellant challenges the following statements by the prosecutor made during the punishment stage of the trial:

> “Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is a capital case. This is a death penalty case.

> *160Now, you are aware that the Supreme Court of the United States has said that capital punishment, as it now stands, is unconstitutional. You should also be aware that the State of Texas did not seek the death penalty in this case. Therefore, under no circumstance, can you, or should you, assess the death penalty in this case. Do not consider the death penalty as a punishment.”

Appellant’s contention on appeal that the State was barred from referring in any way to the death penalty is not well taken since no objection whatsoever was voiced at the trial. Nothing is presented for review.

The other ground attacks the court’s charge, since it recited that the range of punishment was any term of years not less than five, *or death.*(As stated previously, the State had filed a notice of its intention not to seek the death penalty.) Any possible error in the court’s charge has not been preserved since the record is void of any objections to the charge.

We find no reversible error. The judgment is affirmed.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 8, 2011*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**L.229 Identified Miscellaneous Financial Claims - Part I** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### TURKEN PLUMBING COMPANY, INC., a corporation, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SEVEN TRAILS WEST COMPANY, a Limited Partnership, Consisting of Ballwin Investment Company, a Corporation, General Partner, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 34806.

Missouri Court of Appeals, St. Louis District.

Jan. 3, 1974.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 11, 1974.

*66Susman, Stern, Agatstein & Heifetz, Clayton, for defendants-appellants.

Newell S. Ferry, William R. Hirsch, Clayton, for plaintiff-respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants’ motion for a new trial was denied on July 13, 1972. The notice of appeal was filed on July 21, 1972. On December 21, 1972, 153 days after that filing, the trial court issued a “nunc pro tunc order” granting appellants an additional 90 days to file their transcript on appeal. That order fails to indicate a finding of excusable neglect and appears to have been issued ex parte. Appellants filed the transcript on January 15, 1973. On January 31, 1973 the respondent filed a motion to dismiss because of the failure of the appellants to comply with the rules relative to the filing of a transcript. On February 21, 1973 appellants filed a motion in this court to approve the late filing of the transcript.

A transcript on appeal shall be filed with the appellate court within 90 days from the date of the filing of the notice of appeal. Rule 81.18, V.A.M.R. The trial court may, upon notice and motion made after the expiration of this 90 day period, permit the transcript to be filed where the failure to do so within the period was the result of excusable neglect. Rules 81.19 and 44.-01(b)(2). But the trial court may not extend this time beyond 6 months from the filing of the notice of appeal. Rule 81.19.

The “nunc pro tunc order” in this case could not extend the time for filing the transcript under these rules in that (1) it reflects neither notice and motion made nor a finding of excusable neglect; and (2) it purports to extend the time period beyond the 6 month limit. In addition, an order nunc pro tunc has the purpose of correcting a clerical error. It is not used for making a new order but can be used to note on the court’s records an order previously made but not, at that time, recorded. Abbott v. Seamon, 229 S.W.2d 695 (Mo.App.1950). There is no indication that an order was previously made and was, on December 21, being properly recorded.

We are constrained to dismiss appeals for failure to comply with the *67rules where manifest justice does not require our suspension of those rules. Rule 84.08; Ackerman v. Clairtown Investors, Inc., 495 S.W.2d 721 (Mo.App.1973); Donnell v. Vigus Quarries, Inc., 489 S.W.2d 223 (Mo.App.1972). We have reviewed this case and feel there is nothing to compel our suspension of these rules.

The appeal is dismissed.

All Judges concur.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 9, 2010*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.225.i Individual Retirement Accounts IRAs1** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**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**

 

 

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Davidson Income RealEstate, L.P. (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), Steven D. Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer ofthe Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financialofficer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to the best of his 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 materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of thePartnership.

 

 

 

 

Thiscertification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          10,259
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                25,355
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            22,952
<LOANS>                                         83,028
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,524
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 146,883
<DEPOSITS>                                     128,370
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                605
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           109
<OTHER-SE>                                      17,799
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 146,883
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,960
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  336
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   195
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,491
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 935
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 935
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,556
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,390
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    302
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         302
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        16
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.42
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,146
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 1,122
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,508
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       31
<RECOVERIES>                                        12
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,524
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### Paul KINDERKNECHT, Appellant, v. LEXINGTON GROCERY CO., INC. and Everett Reynolds Richie, Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Jan. 19, 1973.

Julian W. Knippenberg, Carroll & Knip-penberg, Lexington, for appellant.

William H. McCann, Brown, Sledd & McCann, Lexington, for appellees.

Memorandum Opinion of the Court by

Special Commissioner BEN MANN,

Affirming.*
**Exhibit31(b)**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I,David A. Christensen, certify that:

 

1.                    I have reviewed this annual report on Form10-Q of Hickory Tech Corporation;

 

2.                    Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.                    Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements and other financial information included in this report fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.                    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

a)                   designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)                  evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

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

 

5.                    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)                   all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)                  any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  May 5, 2004   |
|---------------------------|
|                      |
|                      |
| /s/  David A. Christensen |   |
| David  A. Christensen     |
| Chief  Financial Officer  |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     UNAUDITED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR THE QUARTER ENDED  SEPTEMBER 30, 2000
     THAT ARE FILED WITH THE COMPANY'S  REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB/A AND IS QUALIFIED
     IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000768152
<NAME>                        Light Management Group, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 2,344,817
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              2,379,872
<PP&E>                                        1,433,999
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (254,138)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                7,014,937
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           819,243
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                   3,100,000
<COMMON>                                        224,345
<OTHER-SE>                                    5,407,874
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  7,014,937
<SALES>                                       1,634,042
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              1,635,045
<CGS>                                           886,354
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 1,729,422
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               27,131
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (1,007,862)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        435
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (1,008,297)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (851,159)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1,859,456)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.000)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.000)



</TABLE>
# Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of
DirectorsTierOne Corporation:

We consent to the use of our reports
dated March 8, 2006, with respect to the consolidated statement of financial
condition of TierOne Corporation as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related
consolidated statements of income, stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, managements
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2005, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2005, included herein.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Lincoln, NebraskaMarch 8,
2006
Exhibit 32.02

                            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 Sbarro, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 18, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony J.
Puglisi, Vice President-Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the
best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  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.


Date:  June 2, 2004


/s/ Anthony J. Puglisi
----------------------
Anthony J. Puglisi,
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

NOTE: A signed original of this certification 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.
**Exhibit 32.2**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION*In connection with the Quarterly Report of Rurban Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Duane L. Sinn, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as adoptedpursuant 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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.     /s/ Duane L. Sinn*     Print Name: Duane L. Sinn
| (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;  and |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      October      23, 2008                                  |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                              |   |
|                                                              |   |
| /s/ Charles E. Leibold                                            |   |
| Charles      E. Leibold                                           |   |
| Chief      Financial Officer andPrincipal      Accounting Officer |   |