alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
f8k0729_x101-riic.htm


     

    
      	
               [Logo]
                BANK
                OF SCOTLAND

            	 	 AMSTERDAM
              BRANCH
	
               C
                O R P O R A T E

            	 	  Queens
              Towers
	 	 	
               Delflandlaan
                1

               1082
                EA Amsterdam

               Telefoon:
                +31 20 3057 836

               ABN
                AMRO Bank nr. 55.36.38.67.858

               KvK:
                34122516

               BTW:
                NL8088.33.546

            


    

     

    Private
      & Confidential

    Royal
      Invest Europe B.V.

    Mr.
      D.
      Havenaar

    Dittlaar
      7

    1070
      AC  Amsterdam

    The
      Netherlands

     

    23 November, 2007

     

    Royal Invest Europe B.V. €100,000,000.00 Senior
      Facility

     

    Dear Mr Havenaar,

     

    We are pleased to confirm that our Executive has given approval to provide
      €100.000.000, - debt facility to Royal Invest Europe B.V. for
      the
      purpose of the acquisition of a mixed property investment portfolio. 
Supporting this approval please find attached the Term Sheet outlining the
      final
      conditions that should be satisfied before drawdown of the funds.

     

    Please confirm your acceptance by returning the signed
      Term
      Sheet.

     

    Kinds Regards,

     

    /s/Jim Donnelly, Associate Director

    Bank of Scotland

    Amsterdam Branch

     

     

     

    
      	 www.bankscotland.co.uk/corporate 	 	Part
              of HBOS Group
	 	 	Bank
              of Scotland, plc
               Registered in Scotland number:
                SC327000

              Registered Office: The Mound, Edingburgh EH1
                1YZ

              Authorized and regulated by the

              Financial Service
                Authority.         

            


    

    .
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A0867. RONISHA GUIDRY v. RESIDENTIAL HOME BUYER

ATLANTA, LLC.

Residential Home Buyer Atlanta, LLC filed a dispossessory action against

Ronisha Guidry. In an order entered on December 4, 2023, the state court granted

Residential Home Buyer a default judgment andwrit of possession. On December 21,

2023, Guidry filed a notice of appeal to this Court. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

Under OCGA § 44-7-56, an appeal from a trial court judgment in a

dispossessoryproceeding must be filedwithin seven daysofthe date the judgment was

entered. See Radio Sandy Springs, Inc. v. Allen Road Joint Venture, 311 Ga. App. 334,

335-336 (715 SE2d 752) (2011); Ray M. Wright, Inc. v. Jones, 239 Ga. App. 521,

522-523 (521 SE2d 456) (1999).The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an

absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on thisCourt. Jones, 239 Ga.App. at 523.

Guidry filed her notice of appeal 17 days after entry of the state court’s order.

Accordingly, this appeal is untimely and is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office,Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

January 24, 2024

01/24/2024
#### In the Matter of Raymond C. Miller Sr., Appellant, v Patricia A. Miller, Respondent. (And Another Related Proceeding.)

Submitted December 6, 2010;

decided January 18, 2011

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order that affirmed the dismissal of the application to adjudicate respondent in violation of an order of visitation, dismissed upon the ground that such portion of the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.

Judge Pigott taking no part.
EXHIBIT 31.2
IEA Income Fund VIII
Rule 13a-14 CERTIFICATION
     I, John Kallas, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IEA Income FundVIII (the “Registrant”);
     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisquarterly report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theRegistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
     4. The other certifying officer of Cronos Capital Corp. (“CCC”), theGeneral Partner of the Registrant, and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have:
          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is beingprepared; and
          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, based on ourevaluation; and
          (c) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
     5. CCC’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theRegistrant’s auditors and the Audit Committee of Registrant’s Board ofDirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: August 12, 2004
/s/ JOHN KALLAS
#### TMR Bayhead Securities, LLC, et al., Respondents, v Aegis Texas Venture Fund II, LP, et al., Appellants.

[977 NYS2d 1]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered May 30, 2012, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs TMR Bayhead Securities LLC and Todd Roberts’s motion to compel defendants (fund entities) to reimburse and advance legal fees and costs incurred on behalf of Roberts in defending against a suit commenced by, inter alia, the fund entities, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court properly granted Roberts’ request for advancement of fees. Contrary to the fund entities’ contentions, the requested fees were not excessive or unreasonable, and Roberts’s counsel submitted detailed documentation to substantiate those fees. Roberts’s counsel’s representation that the work done during the relevant time period would not have been any less had Bayhead, wholly owned by Roberts, not been named as a defendant, sufficed for the court to conclude that a portion of legal fees need not be allocated to Bayhead for this time period (F*icus Invs., Inc. v Private Capital Mgt., LLC,*63 AD3d 611, 612 [1st Dept 2009]). Pursuant to the applicable laws governing the agreements regarding advancement of legal fees, Roberts was entitled to advancement of costs to cover his counterclaims, which largely arise from the same facts as the fund entities’ claims against him in the companion action *(see Duthie v CorSolutions Med., Inc.,*2009 WL 1743650, *2-3, 2009 Del Ch LEXIS 112, *4-10 [June 16, 2009, No. 3048-VCN]; Za*man v Amedeo Holdings, Inc.,*2008 WL 2168397, *34-35, 2008 Del Ch LEXIS 60, *114-124 [May 23, 2008, No. 3115-VCS]).

The fund entities’ argument as to the motion court’s denial of their motion to renew is not properly before this Court, since the fund entities have not yet filed a notice of appeal from that order *(see Weinstein v Gindi,*92 AD3d 526, 528 [1st Dept 2012]), and their arguments refer to matters outside the scope of the appellate record that were not before the motion court when it decided the order on appeal *(see Matter of Kent v Kent,*29 AD3d 123, 130 [1st Dept 2006]; *Hecht v City of New York,*60 NY2d 57, 61-62 [1983]). Concur — Tom, J.P, Mazzarelli, Freedman, Richter and Feinman, JJ.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-66450, 33-93938 and No. 333-09169) pertaining to the 1992 Stock
Option Plan of Shaman Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our report dated January 20,
1997, with respect to the financial statements of Shaman Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.
 
                                                               ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Palo Alto, California
March 11, 1997
 
                                       53
Auto Direct Holdings, Inc. Exhibit 10.1











 








November 20, 2007








Bradley D. Harrison

Law Office of Bradley D. Harrison 

8318 Trail Lake Dr.

Rowlette, Texas

75088

Attention: Mr. Bradley D. Harrison

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation to the Form SB-1/A “Registration Statement Under the Securities Act of 1933” of Auto Direct Holdings, Inc. financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 and our independent auditors report dated March 21, 2007.








Yours very truly,



 



SF Partnership, LLP
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 947

To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to modify the 

provisions relating to citations and penalties. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 28, 2005

Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. LAUTENBERG, and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL

To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 

to modify the provisions relating to citations and penalties.

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 ‘‘Workplace Wrongful 

5 Death Accountability Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. OSHA CRIMINAL PENALTIES. 

7 Section 17 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 

8 of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 666) is amended—

9 (1) in subsection (e)—
2

•S 947 IS 

1 (A) by striking ‘‘fine of not more than 

2 $10,000’’ and inserting ‘‘fine in accordance 

3 with section 3571 of title 18, United States 

4 Code,’’; 

5 (B) by striking ‘‘six months’’ and inserting 

6 ‘‘10 years’’; 

7 (C) by striking ‘‘fine of not more than 

8 $20,000’’ and inserting ‘‘fine in accordance 

9 with section 3571 of title 18, United States 

10 Code,’’; 

11 (D) by striking ‘‘one year’’ and inserting 

12 ‘‘20 years’’; and 

13 (E) by inserting ‘‘under this subsection or 

14 subsection (i)’’ after ‘‘first conviction of such 

15 person’’; 

16 (2) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘fine of not 

17 more than $1,000 or by imprisonment for not more 

18 than six months,’’ and inserting ‘‘fine in accordance 

19 with section 3571 of title 18, United States Code, or 

20 by imprisonment for not more than 2 years,’’; and 

21 (3) in subsection (g), by striking ‘‘fine of not 

22 more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not 

23 more than six months,’’ and inserting ‘‘fine in ac24 cordance with section 3571 of title 18, United States 
3

•S 947 IS 

1 Code, or by imprisonment for not more than 1 

2 year,’’.

Æ
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 837 

To amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to clarify the definition of the 

term ‘‘underground injection’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 18, 2005 

Mr. INHOFE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to clarify the 

definition of the term ‘‘underground injection’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. HYDRAULIC FRACTURING. 

4 Section 1421(d) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 

5 U.S.C. 300h(d)) is amended by striking paragraph (1) and 

6 inserting the following: 

7 ‘‘(1) DEFINITION OF UNDERGROUND INJEC8 TION.— 
2 

•S 837 IS

1 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘under2 ground injection’ means the subsurface em3 placement of fluids by well injection. 

4 ‘‘(B) EXCLUSION.—The term ‘under5 ground injection’ does not include— 

6 ‘‘(i) the underground injection of nat7 ural gas for purposes of storage; or 

8 ‘‘(ii) the underground injection of 

9 fluids or propping agents pursuant to hy10 draulic fracturing operations relating to oil 

11 or gas production activities.’’. 

Æ
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BRANDON M. CAPLES STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHRISTOPHER G. MITCHELL

No. 512P05

ORDER

The Attorney General’s Petition for Discretionary Review for defendant Capíes is allowed, pursuant to our general supervisory authority under Article IV, Section 12 of the Constitution of North Carolina, for the limited purpose of (1) vacating that portion of the Court of Appeals opinion ordering remand to the trial court for resentencing and (2) remanding to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of *State v. Timothy Earl Blackwell,*361 N.C. 41, - S.E.2d-(2006). The Court of Appeals opinion remains undisturbed in all other respects.

The Attorney General’s Petition for Discretionary Review for defendant Mitchell is allowed for the limited purpose of (1) vacating that portion of the Court of Appeals opinion ordering remand to the trial court for resentencing and (2) remanding to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of *State v. Timothy Earl Blackwell,*361 N.C. 41, -S.E.2d-(2006). The Court of Appeals opinion remains undisturbed in all other respects.

By Order of the Court in Conference, this 21st day of December, 2006.

s/Timmons-Goodson. J. For the Court
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 870 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 87
109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 870

                To prohibit energy market manipulation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 21, 2005

 Ms. Cantwell introduced the following bill; which was read the first 
                                  time

                             April 22, 2005

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                To prohibit energy market manipulation.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Electricity Needs Rules and 
Oversight Now (ENRON) Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF ENERGY MARKET MANIPULATION.

    (a) Prohibition.--Part II of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824 
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 215. PROHIBITION OF MARKET MANIPULATION.

    ``It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to 
use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of electric 
energy or the purchase or sale of transmission services subject to the 
jurisdiction of the Commission, any manipulative or deceptive device or 
contrivance in contravention of such regulations as the Commission may 
promulgate as appropriate in the public interest or for the protection 
of electric ratepayers.''.
    (b) Rates Resulting From Market Manipulation.--Section 205(a) of 
the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824d(a)) is amended by inserting after 
``not just and reasonable'' the following: ``or that result from a 
manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance''.
                                                        Calendar No. 87

109th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 870

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

                To prohibit energy market manipulation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 22, 2005

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
Exhibit 31.1

**CERTIFICATION**

I,Neil Leibman, Chief Executive Officer of Gexa Corp., certify that:

          1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Gexa Corp.;

          2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

          3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

          4.The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

                    (a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

                    (b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

                    (c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyeffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

          5.The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

                    (a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

                    (b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 13.2


                            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 Annual Report of Videotron Ltee (the "Company")
on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Yvan Gingras,
Executive Vice President, Finance and Operations and 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; 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: March 24, 2005
                                           /s/ Yvan Gingras
                            ----------------------------------------------------
                                               Yvan Gingras
                            Executive Vice President, Finance and Operations and
                                          Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 10.6

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS

In December 2006, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of WMS
Industries Inc. (the Company) and the independent members of the Board of Directors of the Company approved the following base salaries to be paid for calendar year 2007 effective December 24, 2006, to the individuals listed below
who were listed as named executive officers in the Companys proxy statement for the 2006 annual meeting of stockholders:



|                      |  |                                                                                            |  |            
|--------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | -----------
|Name                  |  | Title                                                                                      |  | 2007 Salary
|Brian R. Gamache      |  | President and Chief Executive Officer                                                      |  | $809,000   
|Orrin J. Edidin       |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer                                       |  | $513,000   
|Scott D. Schweinfurth |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer                                       |  | $471,000   
|Kathleen J. McJohn    |  | Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary                                              |  | $325,000   
|Patricia Barten       |  | Senior Vice President, Manufacturing Supply Chain and Business Processes of WMS Gaming Inc |  | $299,000