alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Powell *v.*Morrison.

Opinion delivered January 15, 1923.

Mortgages — sale under power — delegation op authority. — A sale by an appointee of the trustee in a mortgage authorizing the trustee to appoint an agent to make such sale is valid, and not the exercise of an unauthorized delegation of power.

Appeal from Crittenden Circuit Court, Second Division; *J. M. Futrell,*Judge;

affirmed.

*B. J. Semmes,*for appellants.

The power to make the sale could not be delegated to a person -other than the trustee. 70 Ark. 507; 55 Ark. 327. The power being personal to Scithers and requiring discretion, he was under the duty of being- present to exercise the discretion vested in him.

*Hughes &*Hughes, for appellees.

The deed of trust contained express authority for delegation by the trustee of the power to make the sale, and such delegated agent has all authority possessed by the trustee. The case in 55 Ark. 326 certainly conveys •this meaning. See also 31 Cyc. 1427; 1 Mechem on Agency (2nd ed.) sec. 314; *Id.*p. 225. The party making the deed was competent to contract; the thing contracted for was not illegal nor contrary to public policy.

*442McCulloch, C. J.

This is an action to recover possession of a tract of land in Crittenden County, all of the parties claiming title from B. L'. Powell, deceased, as the common source. Appellants, the plaintiffs below, are the heirs at law of Powell, and appellees claim under the foreclosure of a deed of trust, with power of sale, executed by Powell. The trust deed was executed to George H. Scithers, as trustee, to secure a debt to Caldwell & Smith, and it contained the following provision: “And for any sale hereunder the acting trustee is authorized to appoint an agent and auctioneer to make such sale, in the absence of the trustee, as fully and validly as if the trustee were present conducting the sale.”

The sale was made by P. H. Carlisle, who was appointed by Scithers’ so to do, the appointment being in writing. Scithers executed the deed to the purchasers at the sale made by Carlisle.

Counsel for appellants contend that the sale made by Carlisle was void because his appointment by Scithers was an unauthorized delegation of power. They rely, in support of. that contention, on the decision of this court in *North American Trust Co.*v. Chappell, 70 Ark. 507, but the contention of counsel does not find support in that case. There was, in the present instance, express power conferred by the grantor in the deed of trust to the trustee to appoint an agent a substitute for the purpose of making the sale, and the authority was exercised strictly within those limits.

There is no principle of law that forbids a grantor in a deed from granting such authority to a trustee. 1 Meehem on Agency, sec. 306. The judgment of the circuit court was therefore correct.

Affirmed.
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 10
Case 1:11-cr-00430-CMA Document 262 Filed 11/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 10
#### MACK PARAMUS CO. v. THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE BOROUGH OF PARAMUS. BOROUGH OF MIDLAND PARK v. EXCELSIOR PANBRO COMPANIES, INC.

October 3, 1985.

Petition for certification granted. (See 201 *N.J.Super.*508)
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2355 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude certain compensation 

received by public safety officers and their dependents from gross income. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 20, 2014 

Ms. AYOTTE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

certain compensation received by public safety officers 

and their dependents from gross income. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Don’t Tax Our Fallen 

5 Public Safety Heroes Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN COMPENSATION RE7 CEIVED BY PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS AND 

8 THEIR DEPENDENTS. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) of section 104 of 

10 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2355 IS

1 ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (4), by striking the period 

2 at the end of paragraph (5) and inserting ‘‘; and’’, and 

3 by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new para4 graph: 

5 ‘‘(6) amounts received pursuant to— 

6 ‘‘(A) section 1201 of the Omnibus Crime 

7 Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 

8 U.S.C. 3796); or 

9 ‘‘(B) a program established under the laws 

10 of any State which provides monetary com11 pensation for surviving dependents of a public 

12 safety officer who has died as the direct and 

13 proximate result of a personal injury sustained 

14 in the line of duty.’’. 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

16 this section shall apply to amounts received after the date 

17 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                                CERTIFICATION OF
                     CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF INVISA, INC.
                          PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss.1350

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350 and in connection with the annual report
of Invisa, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2002, I, Edmund
C. King, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to the best
of my knowledge and belief:

1.       The Company's 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002, 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 Company's 10-KSB for the year ended
         December 31, 2002, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
         financial condition and results of operations of the Company for said
         period.


/s/  Edmund C. King
---------------------------------------
Edmund C. King, Chief Financial Officer

Date:  June 23, 2003

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Invisa, Inc.
and will be retained by Invisa, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| 1. | I      have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,      2009 of Bluegate Corporation; |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 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)) and internal      control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules      13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and  have: |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 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 registrant’s board      of directors (or persons performing the equivalent    functions): |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November 16, 2009 |   |
|------------------------------|--------|
|                         |   |
|                         |   |
| /s/ Stephen J. Sperco        |   |
| Stephen      J. Sperco       |   |
| Chief      Executive Officer |   |
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  Amendment to Annual  Report of  MachineTalker,
Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-KA for the period ending December 31, 2008 (the
"Report") I, Roland  Bryan,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18 USC  Section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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: November 10, 2009




By: /s/ Roland Bryan
    ----------------------------------------------------------
     Roland Bryan, Chief Financial Officer
     (Principal Accounting Officer)


         This  certification  accompanies  the Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
EXHIBIT 32


                            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 Advance Display Technologies,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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/ MATTHEW W. SHANKLE
------------------------------------------------
Matthew W. Shankle
President, Chief Executive and Financial Officer

May 24, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000769131
<NAME>                        RANCON REALTY FUND V
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         10,500
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,239
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               11,739
<PP&E>                                         31,379
<DEPRECIATION>                                 17,410
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 50,882
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          282
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     33,470
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   50,882
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3,551
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,707
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,625
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             635
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (416)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (416)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (416)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (4.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (4.27)



</TABLE>
[Nos. 34500, 34505.

Department One.

January 8, 1959.]

#### The State of Washington, *Appellant,*v. Raymond Guiles, *Respondent and Cross-appellant.**1*

*Paul Klasen, J. O. Neal*and *John Calbom,*for appellant.

*Lewis & Earl,*for respondent and cross-appellant.

1

 Reported in 333 P. (2d) 923.

Foster, J.

Cross-appellant, defendant below, was convicted of manslaughter'. The state appeals from an order granting a new trial and the defendant cross-appeals from the order denying his motion for arrest of judgment. Because defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment must be sustained, it is unnecessary,to consider the state’s appeal.

The proofs show that the defendant and his wife took their twenty-one-month-old baby daughter to a movie marathon at an outdoor drive-in moving picture theater. They arrived at the theater at approximately 6:00 p. m. and remained until 4:00 a.m. The child was in normal health when the parties left home, but was dead on the following morning at 4:25. An autopsy, performed at 10:00 a. m. the same day, disclosed the cause of death to be multiple acute blunt force injuries to the left scalp. The pathologist who performed the *post-mortem*examination testified that the injuries were not self-inflicted.

Two other persons besides the defendant and his infant daughter were in the car during the performance. Throughout the night the adults drank bottled beer provided by *387defendant. There is, however, no proof as to who inflicted the injuries from which the child died. Reprehensible and repulsive as the conduct of the defendant is, nevertheless, it is not proof of manslaughter.

The court erred, therefore, in denying the motion in arrest of judgment.

The judgment is reversed and the information dismissed.

Mallery, Finley, and Ott, JJ., concur.

Hill, C. J., concurs in the result.
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 quarterly report of 24Holdings Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Kirk M. Warshaw, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended; and                  
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|

|Dated: August 10, 2009             
|-----------------------------------
|                                   
|/s/ Kirk M. Warshaw                
|-----------------------------------
|Kirk M. Warshaw                    
|Chief Financial Officer            

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**

 

Certification Pursuant

To 18 U.S.C. 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CyanotechCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, William R. Maris, Vice President — Finance andAdministration 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:

 

1)                                      The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)); and

 

2)                                      The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material aspects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  |   November 7, 2007 |   |                                           | /s/ William R. Maris |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------|----------------------|--------|
|   |                              |   | William R. Maris                               |
|   |                              |   | Vice President – Finance &       |
|   |                              |   | Administration,                                |
|   |                              |   | Chief Financial Officer                        |
|   |                              |   | (Principal Financial and Accounting   Officer) |

 

----
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION
302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Donald W. Prosser, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of VCG Holding Corp. for
the fiscal period ended December 31, 2004;



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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The small business issuers other certifying officer 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 small business issuer and we have:



(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the small business
issuer, including its consolidated subsidiary, is made known to us by others within that entity, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting;



5. The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of small business issuers board of directors:



(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal controls which could adversely affect the small business issuers ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the small business issuers auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and



(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small
business issuers internal controls.



|                   |  |  |  |                                        |  | 
|------------------ |  |  |  | -------------------------------------- |  | 
|Date: May 27, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Donald W. Prosser                  |  | 
|                   |  |  |  | Donald W. Prosser                      |  | 
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Financial and Accounting Officer
|                   |  |  |  | (Principal Financial Officer)          |  |
petv_ex101.htm


EXHIBIT 10.1


 





 




  





- 1 -











  






 






 




  





- 2 -











  








 






 




  





- 3 -











  








 






 


- 4 -
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00208-CV

In the ESTATE OF William Stacy LONGSTRETH, Deceased

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13310

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE BARNARD, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED 

and this appeal is DISMISSED. 

We order that appellee Caroline Longstreth recover her costs of appeal, if any, from 

appellant Nan J. Ginger. 

SIGNED April 17, 2013.

_________________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice