alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Hattie M. Brooks *v.*Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, William H. Skinner, Betty S. Barteau, and James M. Organ, as Members of and Constituting the Review Board and Gary Convalescent Home, Inc.

[No. 572A246.

Filed December 12, 1972.]

*412
      *Legal Aid Society of Gary, Inc.*by *William H: Von Wilier,*of Gary, for appellant.

*Theodore L. Sendak,*Attorney General, *Stephen J. Cuthbert,*Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.

White, J.

The question before the Employment Security Division in this case, as in *Long*v. *Review Board*(1971), 150 Ind. App. 516, 276 N.E.2d 881, 28 Ind. Dec. 511, was whether claimant-appellant left her employment for “good cause”. As in *Long,*the referee found good cause and the Review Board reversed. In both cases appellant relies on *Nordhoff*v. *Review Board*(1959), 129 Ind. App. 378, 156 N.E.2d 787, in contending that the Board ignored competent evidence. What we said in *Long*(276 N.E.2d at 882, 28 Ind. Dec. at 514) in distinguishing *Nordhoff*and demonstrating that competent evidence had not been ignored *413but had been weighed and found unconvincing is equally applicable to the case at bar. We adopt it as the statement of our reason for rejecting the same argument here.

Appellant here, however, adds a new contention. She argues that since the Board heard no additional evidence and made its decision on the testimony heard only by the referee “the same logic which prevents the Supreme and Appellate Courts from weighing the credibility of witnesses should prevent the Review Board from weighing the witnesses’ credibility.” No authority is cited. The Board’s only response is that it did what “it is required to do by statute”. Neither the statute nor any other authority is cited. Our independent research has lead us to the case of *Ogilvie*v. *Review Board*(1962), 133 Ind. App. 664, 184 N.E.2d 817, which contains a lengthy, well documented, and well reasoned discussion of the “novel theory” that “the same rule of judicial appellate practice applies to the appeal from the Claims Deputy to the Referee and the Referee to the Review Board because the Referee and the Review Board are ‘appellate tribunals’ ”. (Id. at 672, 184 N.E.2d at 821.) The theory was rejected there and we reject it here for the reasons there stated.

The decision of the. Review Board is affirmed.

Buchanan, P.J., and Sullivan, J., concur.

Note. — Reported at 290 N.E.2d 137.
**
**Exhibit 13.2**

**Certification by the Principal Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I, In Joon Hwang, Chief Financial Officer of LINE Corporation (the “Company”), hereby 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: 

 
 • 
the Company’s annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal yearended December 31, 2018, as previously amended by Amendment No. 1 on Form 20-F/A and as further amended by Amendment No. 2 on Form 20-F/A (the“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

 
 • 
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein. 

Date: September 27, 2019 

 

By:
 
/s/ In Joon Hwang
 
Name: In Joon Hwang
 
Title: Chief Financial Officer
**
865 A.2d 636

#### IN THE MATTER OF NKEM E. ODINKEMERE, A/K/A E. NKEM ODINKEMERE AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 001231993).

January 21, 2005.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 04-147, concluding that NKEM E. ODINKEMERE, a/k/a E. NKEM ODINKEMERE, formerly of IRVING-TON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1993, and who has been temporarily suspended from the practice of law since November 15,2000, should be disbarred;

And NKEM E. ODINKEMERE, a/k/a E. NKEM ODINKEMERE, having been ordered to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that NKEM E. ODINKEMERE, a/k/a E. NKEM ODINKEMERE, be disbarred, effective immediately, and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that NKEM E. ODINKEMERE, a/k/a E. NKEM ODINKEMERE, be and hereby is permanently restrained and enjoined from practicing law; and it is further

ORDERED that all funds, if any, currently existing in any New Jersey financial institution maintained by NKEM E. ODINKEMERE, a/k/a E. NKEM ODINKEMERE pursuant to *Rule*1:21-6, which were restrained from disbursement by Order of the Court filed November 15, 2000, shall be transferred by the financial institution to the Clerk of the Superior Court, who is directed to deposit the funds in the Superior Court Trust Fund pending further Order of this Court; and it is further

*275ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.
<PAGE>
                                                                           Ex 15

                          ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                REGARDING INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REVIEW REPORT


The Board of Directors
Northfield Laboratories Inc.:

With respect to registration statements on Form S-8 of Northfield Laboratories
Inc., we acknowledge our awareness of the use therein of our report dated
December 16, 2002 related to our review of interim financial information.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, such report is not
considered a part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning
of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

Very truly yours,

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chicago, Illinois
January 14, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements found in the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended August 28, 1999, and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         MAY-27-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            MAY-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              AUG-28-1999
<CASH>                                         15,255
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  20,050
<ALLOWANCES>                                      237
<INVENTORY>                                     8,280
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               44,972
<PP&E>                                        111,877
<DEPRECIATION>                                 53,703
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                112,080
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          27,286
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       45,477
<OTHER-SE>                                      6,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  112,080
<SALES>                                        34,098
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               34,098
<CGS>                                          28,019
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  28,019
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                3,403
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 1,695
<INCOME-TAX>                                      661
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             1,034
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,034
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.16


</TABLE>
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-13-00383-CR

STEVEN BREED

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On appeal from the

292nd District Court of Dallas County, Texas

Trial Cause No. F12-51946-V

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 11, 2015.
II. Miscellaneous Provisions.          1. In order to induce the Lenders to enter into this Fifth Amendment, the Borrower herebyrepresents and warrants that (i) no Default or Event of Default exists as of the Fifth AmendmentEffective Date (as defined herein) before or after giving effect to this Fifth Amendment and (ii)all of the representations and warranties contained in the Credit Agreement or the other CreditDocuments are true and correct in all material respects on the Fifth Amendment Effective Date bothbefore and after giving effect to this Fifth Amendment, with the same effect as though suchrepresentations and warranties had been made on and as of the Fifth Amendment Effective Date (itbeing understood that any representation or warranty made as of a specific date shall be true andcorrect in all material respects as of such specific date).          2. The Credit Agreement is modified only by the express provisions of this Fifth Amendment andthis Fifth Amendment shall not constitute a modification, acceptance or waiver of any otherprovision of the Credit Agreement or any other Credit Document except as specifically set forthherein.          3. This Fifth Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts and by the differentparties hereto on separate counterparts, each of which counterparts when executed and deliveredshall be an original, but all of which shall together constitute one and the same instrument. Acomplete set of counterparts shall be lodged with the Borrower and the Administrative Agent.          **4. THIS FIFTH AMENDMENT AND THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES HEREUNDER SHALL BECONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.**          5. This Fifth Amendment shall become effective on the date (the “Fifth AmendmentEffective Date”) when the Borrower, each other Credit Party and the Required Lenders shallhave signed a counterpart hereof (whether the same or different counterparts) and shall havedelivered (including by way of facsimile or other electronic transmission) the same to White &Case LLP, 1155 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10036; Attention: May Yip (facsimile number:212-354-8113 / email: myip@whitecase.com).          6. From and after the Fifth Amendment Effective Date, all references in the Credit Agreementand each of the other Credit Documents to the Credit Agreement shall be deemed to be references tothe Credit Agreement, as modified hereby.* * *
 

 
          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized officers to executeand deliver this Fifth Amendment as of the date first above written.      NORDEA BANK FINLAND PLC, NEW YORK
(logo) CWCapital

ASSET MANAGEMENT

 

 

**Annual Statement as toCompliance**

**For the Period of January1, 2016 to December 31, 2016**

 

 

**WFRBS 2014-C21**

 

 

In accordance with Item 1123of Regulation AB and with the requirements detailed in §11.12 of thePooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”) for theabove-mentioned CMBS pool, (the “CMBS Pool”), CWCapital AssetManagement LLC (“CWCAM”), in its capacity as Special Servicer, isproviding this Officer’s Certificate with respect to the following:

 

(A)         a review of CWCAM’s activities during the preceding calendar year orportion thereof (the “Reporting Period”) and of CWCAM’sperformance under the Agreement has been made under such officer’ssupervision and;

 

(B)          to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, CWCAM hasfulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

Should you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us. 

 

Sincerely,

CWCapital Asset Management LLC

 

  

/s/ David B. Iannarone

David B. Iannarone 

President 

 

 

7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite500 West, Bethesda, MD 20814

www.cwcapital.com
#### In the Interest of A.R. and A.R., children. D.R., Petitioner, v. Department of Children and Family Services and Guardian Ad Litem Program, Respondent.

No. 2D10-2171.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 24, 2010.

Toni A. Butler of Toni A. Butler, P.A., Naples, for Petitioner.

Jeffrey Dana Gillen, West Palm Beach, for Respondent Department of Children and Family Services.

Jennifer S. Paulin and Laura E. Lawson, Tavares, for Respondent Guardian ad Litem Program.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for certiorari filed by the Father, D.R., is dismissed. In dismissing the petition, the court makes no determination as to any potential future rights or appeals the Father may have.

DAVIS, CRENSHAW, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold Closed Meetings on Wednesday, October 13, 2010 at 11:30 a.m., and Thursday, October 14, 2010 at 2 p.m.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meetings. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meetings.

Commissioner Aguilar, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the Closed Meetings in closed sessions.

The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, October 13, 2010 will be:

Institution of injunctive actions;

Institution of administrative proceedings; and

Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, October 14, 2010 will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;

Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;

An adjudicatory matter; and

Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:

The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: October 6, 2010.

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2010-25594 Filed 10-6-10; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
868 A.2d 289

#### IN THE MATTER OF STEVEN A. PASTERNAK, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 024961982).

February 25, 2005.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 04-246, concluding that STEVEN A. PASTERNAK of LIVINGSTON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1982, and who has been temporarily suspended from practice since October 4, 2001, should be disbarred for the knowing misappropriation of trust funds in violation of *RPC*1.15;

And STEVEN A. PASTERNAK having been ordered to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined;

And good cause appearing;

*532It is ORDERED that STEVEN A. PASTERNAK be disbarred, effective immediately, and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys;

ORDERED that STEVEN A. PASTERNAK be and hereby is permanently restrained and enjoined from practicing law; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.
#### William C. SMITH, Appellant, v. Greg RISKA, Warden, and Walter A. McNeil, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Appellees.

No. 1D10-2842.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 29, 2010.

William C. Smith, pro se, Appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Eric Neiberger, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

In accordance with appellees’ proper concession of error and motion to remand, the order of dismissal being appealed herein is reversed. The matter is remanded to the lower tribunal with directions to transfer the petition for writ of mandamus to the Circuit Court for the Second Judicial Circuit, in and for Leon County, for further proceedings. *See Bush v. State,*945 So.2d 1207 (Fla.2006).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
#### Marvin E. NOACK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D10-0244.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 13, 2011.

Jeffrey Lewis, Regional Conflict Counsel, Jacksonville, Sheila Callahan, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee, and Luke Newman, Special Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Charmaine M. Millsaps, Assistant Attorney General, and Michael T. Kennett, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This case is one of many reaching us in the wake of *State v. Montgomery,*39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010). Mr. Noack argues that his convictions for second-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder should be overturned because the trial court gave an instruction on manslaughter by act similar to the instruction that the supreme court found to be fundamentally erroneous in *Montgomery.*The state properly concedes error under our cases, in which we have found the “interim” instruction given in the present case to be fundamentally erroneous. *See, e.g., Pryor v. State,*48 So.3d 159, 161-62 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); *Riesel v. State,*48 So.3d 885 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). We have also found that the standard instruction for attempted manslaughter by act suffers from the same defect. *See Herring v. State,*43 So.3d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); *Lamb v. State,*18 So.3d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); *contra Williams v. State,*40 So.3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). Because we are reversing and remanding for a new trial, we do not address Mr. Noack’s claim that he was improperly denied a peremptory challenge. *See generally Melbourne v. State,*679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996).

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

BENTON, C.J., WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 15.4



|     |  |                                                                               |  |                       |  |                                               
|---- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | KPMG en Peru
Torre KPMG. Av. Javier Prado Oeste 203 San Isidro. Lima 27,
Peru |  | Tel8fono
Fax Internet |  | 51 111611 3000
51 (1) 421 6943 www.kpmg.com/pe

Consent of Independent Auditors

The Board of Directors

Generandes Peru S.A:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the December 31, 2015 annual report on Form 20-F of Kenon Holdings Ltd. of our report dated July 4, 2014, with
respect to the consolidated statements of financial position of Generandes Peru S.A. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes in equity and cash flows
for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 not included herein, which report appears in the registration statement (No. 33-206667) on Form F-1 of IC Power Pte. Ltd.



|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|LOGO                               
|Juan José Córdova                  
|                                   
|Partner                            
|                                   
|Caipo y Asociados S. Civil de R. L.
|                                   
|Lima, Peru                         
|                                   
|April 21, 2016                     



| |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |  |  |  |                                                                               
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | Caipo y Asociados S. Civil de Fl.L., sociedad civil paruana de rasponsabilidad limitada y firma mlembro de la rad de firmas miambro independientes de KPMG aliliadas a KPMG International Cooparative lKPMG
International). una antldad suiza. |  |  |  | lnscrita an la partida N° 01681796 del
Registro de Parsonas Jurldicas de Lima.
# District of Columbia

Court of Appeals

Nos. 12

- AA

- 723 & 12

- AA

- 724

SPRING VALLEY

- WESLEY

HEIGHTS CITIZENS ASSOCIATION,

and

WESTOVER PLACE HOMES CORPORATION,

Petitioner s

,

ZC11

- 07

v.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ZONING COMMISSION,

Respondent,

and

THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY,

Intervenor.

Before: Washington, Chief Judge; Glickman, Associate Judge; and Ruiz, Senior Judge

.

O R D E R

On consideration of the petitioners’ petition for rehearing, respondent’s

opposition, and intervenor’s response thereto, it is

ORDERED by the merits division that the petitioners’ petition for rehearing is

granted, and this court’s November 14, 2 013 *

, opinion is amended by striking S ection

II(C)(3) of the November 14, 2013, opinion a nd replacing it with a revised S ection

II(C)(3).

* 79 A.3d 904 (D.C. 2013).It is FURTHER ORDERED that the November 14, 2013, opinion is withdrawn,

and the Clerk shall reissue the opinion forthwith.

PER CURIAM.

Copies to:

Paul J. Kiernan, Esq.

Holland & Knight

800 17 th Street, NW

- Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20006

Michael Mazzuchi, Esq.

4430 Macomb Street, NW

Washington, DC 20016

Paul A. Trummonds, Esq.

Goulston & Storrs, P.C.

1999 K Street, NW

– Suite 500

Washington, DC 20006

Todd S. Kim, Esq.

Solicitor General

– DC

jac