alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
     I, J. Roe Buckley, Chief Financial Officer ofMewbourne Development Corporation, Managing GeneralPartner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. (the“Registrant”), certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form10-K of Mewbourne Energy Partners, 03-A, L.P.
     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made,not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis annual report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this annual report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officersand I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for theregistrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls andprocedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;
b. evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures as of a date within 90 days priorto the filing date of this annual report (the“Evaluation Date”); and
c. presented in this annual report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures based onour evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officersand I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent function):
a. all significant deficiencies in thedesign or operation of internal controlswhich could adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize andreport financial data andhave identified for the registrant’s auditorsany material weaknesses in internal controls;and
b. any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls; and
     6. The registrant’s other certifying officersand I have indicated in this annual report whether ornot there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that couldsignificantly affect internal controls subsequent tothe date of our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: March 29, 2004. /s/ J. Roe Buckley J. Roe BuckleyChief Financial OfficerMewbourne Development Corporation,Managing General Partner of the Registrant
Exhibit 99.3

Annual Servicers' Report

March 29, 2004

Fitch, Inc.
One State Street Plaza
New York, New York 10004
Moody's Investors Service Inc.
99 Church Street
New York, New York 10007
Standard & Poor's Rating Services,
a division of the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
55 Water Street
New York, New York 10041
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas
60 Wall Street
New York, New York 10005
College Loan Corporation Trust I (the "Trust")
c/o Wilmington Trust Company
Rodney Square North
1100 North Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19890

As an officer of College Loan Corporation, the issuer administrator (the
Administrator) of the Trust, I hereby certify that:

|1. | a review of the activities of the servicers during the preceding
calendar year and of their performance under the servicing agreements has been
made under my supervision; and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2. | to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the servicers
have fulfilled all of their obligations under the servicing agreements
throughout the period ended December 31, 2003, and there have been no known
defaults in the fulfillment of such obligations.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Cary Katz
Cary Katz
President and CEO
| | -----------------------------------------
Opinion filed October 18 , 2018



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

_____ _

_____


### No. 11

- 1 7

- 00 1 8 6

- C V

_____ _

_____



### DAVID MEISELL ET AL.

, Appellant s

V.

ECTOR COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT ET AL.

, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 1 61s t District Court

Ector County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. B

- 16

- 12

- 1180

- CV

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant s have filed in this court a n unopposed motion to di smis s this appeal.

Appellant s state that “[a]ll claims have now been settled or otherwise resolved,” and

Appellants request that this court dismiss this cause. I n accordance with Appellant s ’

request, we dismiss th is appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1 (a)(1)

.

The motion to dismiss is granted, and th e appeal is dismissed

.

October 18 , 2018 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Willson , J., and Wright, S.C.J. 1

Willson, J., not participating.

1 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                        Consent of Independent Auditors
                             And Report on Schedule

The Board of Directors
Blue Martini Software, Inc.:

   The audits referred to in our report dated February 29, 2000, except as to
Note 12, which is as of April 24, 2000, included the related financial
statement schedule as of December 31, 1999, and for the period from June 5,
1998 (inception) to December 31, 1998, and for the year ended December 31, 1999
are included in the registration statement. This financial statement schedule
is the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on this financial statement schedule based on our audits. In
our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to
the basic financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly, in all
material respects, the information set forth therein.

   We consent to the use of our reports included herein and to the references
to our firm under the heading "Experts" and "Selected Financial Data" in the
prospectus.

                                          /s/ KPMG LLP

Mountain View, California

July 20, 2000
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1137 

KA 11-01039 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, SCONIERS, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JASON LAWSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

(APPEAL NO. 9.)

 

LINDA M. CAMPBELL, SYRACUSE, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (VICTORIA M. WHITE

OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Jeffrey R.

Merrill, A.J.), rendered October 5, 2010. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Same Memorandum as in People v Lawson ([appeal No. 7] ___ AD3d

___ [Jan. 2, 2015]).

Entered: January 2, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the references to our firm under the caption "Experts" and
"Selected Financial Data", and to the use of our report dated March 24, 2000,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Microtune, Inc. and to
the use of our report dated March 24, 2000, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of HMTF Acquisition (Bermuda) Ltd. and the consolidated
financial statements of Temic Telefunken Hochfrequentztechnik GmbH in Amendment
No. 3 to the Registration Statement (Form S-1 No. 333-36340) and related
Prospectus of Microtune, Inc. for the registration of 4,600,000 shares of its
common stock.

                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Dallas, Texas
July 13, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                              17
<SECURITIES>                                     3,494
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,554
<ALLOWANCES>                                       520
<INVENTORY>                                     10,920
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,657
<PP&E>                                          38,243
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,077
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  44,323
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,440
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,751
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,132
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    44,323
<SALES>                                         12,697
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,697
<CGS>                                           10,642
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,642
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,428
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 228
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,601)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (488)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,113)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,113)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.18)


</TABLE>
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 5 , 202 1
.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 20

- 00592

- CV

MARY SIEGFRIED , Appellant
V.
FRED RAHDER AND SHAILI , LLC D/B/A FRIENDS PUB , Appellee s
On Appeal from C ounty Court No
. 3 Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV

- 0086562

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a n order signed August 4, 2020 that denied both appellant Mary Siegfried ’ s motion to dismiss filed on June 1 1 , 2020 , and Marina Perry ’ s motion to dismiss f iled on June 18 , 2020

. On December 10 , 2020 , appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal , which stated that the appellant and appellees2 have settled th eir case in the trial court

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1 (a)(1) . The motion is granted.
We dismiss the a p p eal

. PER CURIAM
Panel c onsists of Justices Bourliot, Zimmere r, and Spain.
----

|   | (1)    | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) 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. |

| March 20, 2009            | /s/ Richard A. Foss                                |   |
|---------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date                      | Richard      A. Foss                               |   |
|                      | President      and Chief Executive Officer         |   |
|                      |                                               |   |
|                      |                                               |   |
| March 20,  2009 | /s/ Diana S. Tone                                  |   |
| Date                      | Diana      S. Tone                                 |   |
|                      | Chief      Financial Officer and ComplianceOfficer |
#### Stuphin et al. *v.*The State, ex rel. Jeby et al.

(No. 25324

Decided November 6, 1935.)

*Mr. Ezra Z. Shapiro,*director of law, and *Mr. Alfred Lawrence,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr. James C. Connell, Mr. Francis Poulson*and *Mr. Francis B. Douglass,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged hy this court, that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same hereby is, reversed; and this court proceeding to render the judgment that the Court of Appeals should have rendered, it is ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

This court finds from the record that the Boxing and Wrestling Commission was authorized to adopt rules; that that commission adopted such rules; that the defendants in error entered into an agreement making such rules govern the contest, and that the rules lodged discretion in such commission, which discretion was exercised in accordance therewith.

*184Mandamus will lie to compel, but not to control, the exercise of discretion. *State, ex rel. Armstrong,*v. *Davey, Governor, ante,*160.

*Judgment of the Court of Appeals reversed, and that of Common Pleas affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Jones, Matthias and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. ■
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 99.4

                         FORM OF SHAREHOLDER ELECTION
                               EAGLE NATIONAL BANK



                             SHAREHOLDER ELECTION

     The undersigned has received and read the Proxy Statement/Prospectus dated
August __, 2000 (the "Proxy Statement") which describes a corporate
reorganization whereby the New Eagle Bank will be consolidated with and into
Eagle National Bank and pursuant to which ENB Bankshares, Inc. will become the
sole shareholder of Eagle National Bank.

     I hereby elect to receive consideration for my shares of stock of Eagle
National Bank pursuant to the reorganization as follows:

     ________________    I elect to receive all shares of common stock of ENB
Bankshares, Inc.

     ________________    I elect to receive all cash.

     ________________    I elect to receive part stock consideration and part
                         cash consideration as follows:

                         __________________  shares of Eagle National Bank stock
                                             for shares of ENB Bankshares common
                                             stock

                         __________________  shares of Eagle National Bank stock
                                             for cash



     IF NO ELECTION IS INDICATED, OR IF YOU DO NOT RETURN THIS FORM TO EAGLE
NATIONAL BANK ON OR BEFORE 10:00 A.M., LOCAL TIME, ON SEPTEMBER 28, 2000, YOU
WILL BE DEEMED TO HAVE ELECTED TO RECEIVE ALL HOLDING COMPANY COMMON STOCK
PURSUANT TO THE REORGANIZATION.

     If I elect the all cash option in the reorganization, I understand that the
selling directors have agreed to cause the Park Cities bank to grant to me the
right to invest the cash proceeds received pursuant to the reorganization in the
Park Cities bank, which is being established to acquire the bank's Park Cities
branch.

Date: __________________                ________________________________________
                                        Signature

                                        ________________________________________
                                        Printed Name

                                        ________________________________________
                                        Signature if Jointly Held

                                        ________________________________________
                                        Printed Name
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 New generation  Holdings,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jacques
Mot,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and 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, to my knowledge 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/ Jacques Mot
- -----------------------
Jacques Mot
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer

February 28, 2005
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices 

# Order

September 15, 2010

141053-4

VICKI L. ZUNICH, Indi vidually, as Next Friend for CHARLES ZUNICH, a Minor, as Next Friend for MATTHEW ZUNICH, a Minor, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEVEN J. ZUNICH, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 141053 COA: 297456 Midland CC: 02-005382-NHMIDMICHIGAN MEDICAL CENTERMIDLAND, JEFFREY S. NEWMAN, M.D., FAMILY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES OF MIDLAND, P.C., a/k/a FAMILY PRACTICE ASSOCIATES OF MIDLAND, P.C., KENNETH M. MACKINNON, M.D., JAMES H. FRYE, M.D., MIDMICHIGAN HEALTH, and FAITH D. FUENTES, M.D., Jointly and Severally, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

VICKI L. ZUNICH, Indi vidually, as Next Friend for CHARLES ZUNICH, a Minor, as Next Friend for MATTHEW ZUNICH, a Minor, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEVEN J. ZUNICH, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 141054 COA: 297457 Midland CC: 03-005843-NH FAMILY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES OF MIDLAND, P.C., Defendant-Appellee,

JERRY L. FERRELL, M. D., and ROBERTA L. CORBAT, Defendants.

_____________ _______________ _____________/I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 15, 2010

y0908 2

On order of the Court, the motion for leave to file brief amicus curiae is GRANTED. The application for leave to ap peal prior to decision by the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, be cause the Court is not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by th is Court before consideration by the Court of Appeals.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ERIC ADDISON.

December 18, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
#### Gloria C. STRAUB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CROWN LIFE INSURANCE CO., a corporation, Defendant-Respondent.

No. 34746.

Missouri Court of Appeals, St. Louis District.

May 22, 1973.

Motion for Rehearing or Transfer Denied June 8, 1973.

Application to Transfer Denied July 16, 1973.

Flynn & Parker, St. Louis, for plaintiff-appellant.

Hocker, Goodwin, Koenig, Gibbons & Fehlig, St. Louis, for defendant-respondent.

CLEMENS, Judge.

Plaintiff sued to recover $10,000 on a duplicate certificate of eligibility as beneficiary under defendant’s group insurance policy issued to Pioneer Liquor Company. Judgment was for defendant and plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

*43As a salesman for Pioneer Liquor Company, William A. Straub was entitled to participate to the extent of $10,000 in his employer’s group life insurance policy issued by defendant insurer. The employer issued Mr. Straub two $10,000 certificates for reasons not entirely clear. When Mr. Straub died plaintiff-beneficiary filed claim on one certificate and defendant paid her $10,000. She then filed a claim on the other certificate and sued when payment was denied.

A contract of group insurance is one between the insurer and the employer for the benefit of the latter’s employees; the certificate of insurance which is issued to the individual employee is merely a statement to him that he is insured under the group policy. The rights of an employee or his beneficiary are determined therefore under the provisions of the contract between the insurer and the employer. Satz v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 225 S.W.2d 480 (Mo.App.1949).

Defendant’s policy states: “This certificate is issued as evidence of insurance under the group policy. The insurance is subject to the terms of the group policy and all provisions of the group policy apply to the insurance whether mentioned in this certificate or not The insurance evidenced by this certificate will not take effect on the date shown unless all the eligibility requirements of the group policy have been complied with If a certificate be issued to an employee who for any reason is not entitled to insurance under this policy, such certificate shall be of no effect, and in the event of any discrepancy between the provisions of this policy and those of any employee’s certificate, the provisions of this policy shall govern.”

Plaintiff’s rights are limited to the terms of defendant’s policy which exclude coverage beyond the $10,000 already paid plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

WEIER, Acting C. J., and McMILLIAN, J., concur.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2137 

To ensure that holders of flood insurance policies under the National Flood 

Insurance Program do not receive premium refunds for coverage of 

second homes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 13, 2014 

Mr. LEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read 

the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To ensure that holders of flood insurance policies under 

the National Flood Insurance Program do not receive 

premium refunds for coverage of second homes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NO REFUNDS UNDER NATIONAL FLOOD INSUR4 ANCE PROGRAM FOR COVERAGE OF SECOND 

5 HOMES. 

6 (a) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘National 

7 Flood Insurance Program’’ means the program estab8 lished under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 

9 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.). 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2137 CPS

1 (b) NO REFUNDS FOR COVERAGE OF SECOND

2 HOMES.—Notwithstanding section 3(a)(4) of the Home3 owner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014 or any 

4 other provision of law, in the case of flood insurance cov5 erage under the National Flood Insurance Program for 

6 a residential property that is not the primary residence 

7 of an individual (as that term is used in section 

8 1307(a)(2)(A) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 

9 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4014(a)(2)(A))), the Administrator of 

10 the Federal Emergency Management Agency may not re11 fund any premium for such coverage collected in excess 

12 of the rates required under the provisions of, and amend13 ments made by, section 3 of the Homeowner Flood Insur14 ance Affordability Act of 2014. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS