alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23

Consent of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors
and Stockholders The Fairchild Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the registration statements (No. 33-38302, 333-49779, 333-62037, 333-97703,
333-82828, 333-16821, 333-70387, 333-70673, and 333-54158) on Forms S-8 of The Fairchild
Corporation of our reports dated December 29, 2005, with respect to the consolidated
balance sheets of The Fairchild Corporation and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2005 and
2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations and other comprehensive income
(loss), stockholders equity, and cash flows for the years ended September 30, 2005
and 2004, the three-month period ended September 30, 2003 and the year ended June 30,
2003, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting as of September 30, 2005, and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting as of September 30, 2005, which reports appear in the September 30,
2005, annual report on Form 10-K of The Fairchild Corporation.

Our report dated December 29, 2005,
on managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
September 30, 2005, expresses our opinion that The Fairchild Corporation did not maintain
effective internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2005 because of
the effect of material weaknesses on the achievement of the objectives of the control
criteria and contains an explanatory paragraph that states, that: (1) the Company did not
have adequate resources in financial statement matters related to the accounting for
complex and non-routine transactions in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles and (2) the Company did not have effective policies and procedures in place to
review and approve the propriety of certain journal entries prepared at two of the
Companys subsidiaries.

/s/ KPMG LLP

McLean, VirginiaDecember
29, 2005
| (1)    | The      Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31,      2009 (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      as of the dates and for the periods presented in the    Report. |

| /s/ Theodore H. Bunting, Jr.Theodore      H. Bunting, Jr.Senior      Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer ofEntergy      Texas, Inc.(acting      principal financial officer) |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT (11)
 
                                    K2 INC.
 
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
 
                  FOR THE THREE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
 
                     (THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE FIGURES)
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                       1996    1995     1994
                                                      ------- -------  -------
<S>                                                   <C>     <C>      <C>
Income from continuing operations.................... $25,217 $19,799  $13,754
Loss from discontinued operations....................          (4,920)    (721)
                                                      ------- -------  -------
Net income........................................... $25,217 $14,879  $13,033
                                                      ======= =======  =======
Primary:
 Average shares outstanding..........................  16,574  14,367   11,800
 Net effect of dilutive stock options under the
  treasury stock method using average price..........     160     131      119
                                                      ------- -------  -------
    Total............................................  16,734  14,498   11,919
                                                      ======= =======  =======
 Per share amounts:
  Continuing operations.............................. $  1.51 $  1.37  $  1.15
  Net income......................................... $  1.51 $  1.03  $  1.09
Fully Diluted:
 Average shares outstanding..........................  16,574  14,367   11,800
 Net effect of dilutive stock options under the
  treasury stock method using year end market price,
  if higher than average market price................     179     212      130
                                                      ------- -------  -------
    Total............................................  16,753  14,579   11,930
                                                      ======= =======  =======
 Per share amounts:
  Continuing operations.............................. $  1.51 $  1.36  $  1.15
  Net income......................................... $  1.51 $  1.02  $  1.09
</TABLE>
#### Tucker *v.*P. & *F.*Corbin.

*(Circuit Court, D. Connecticut.*

March. 2, 1880.)

Tucker v. Burditt and others, ante, 808, followed in this case.

In Equity. Motion for an Attachment.

Shipman, D. J.

This is a motion for an attachment against the defendants for an alleged violation of the injunction order heretofore issued by this court in the above-entitled cause.

The same questions which are presented in the affidavits were tried by Judge Lowell upon a motion for attachment by the present plaintiff against Burditt and others. The motion was denied, and, after examining the various exhibits in the case, I can do no more than refer to the clearly expressed opinion of Judge Lowell as an embodiment of my views. I do not think that any benefit would be conferred upon the parties by now attempting to modify or vary the language which he has used.

In both the Connecticut and Massachusetts cases there were draw pulls which were, after being cleaned from iron scale, tumbled in a barrel containing bits of brass, or brass “scratchers.” By this process the surface.of the articles was “brassed,” or was more or less covered with a deposit of the softer metal. They were then dipped in copal varnish, known as a bronzing varnish, which was hardened in an oven heated to a moderate heat, but not to so great a heat as to oxydize *811the varnish. The conclusions of Judge Lowell, as tothe articles which he specifically mentions, apply with equal force to the “brassed” articles, which he does not particularly specify.

Indeed, the plaintiff admittod that upon the affidavits no other course could be taken than to deny the motion, but he insisted earnestly that there must be a mistake in the statements contained in the affidavits, which mistake could be detected by an expert, who should be directed to make personal inspection at the defendants’ factory.

I do not now think that there is such a mistake, hnd, not suspecting one, it would he a very unusual course to refer the question for further investigation. It may bo that sometimes there is more heat in the oven than at other times, and that inadvertently an oxydizing result has been reached; but the exhibit of varnished and unoxydized butts, which were put into an oven with each batch of varnished oxydized butts, seems to me to he as nearly conclusive on the question of heat, to which the articles were subjected, as any test well can be. The butts which were dried upon the radiator in my chambers have the same general appearance which the oven-dried butts present.

It is manifest that the distance between non-infringement and infringement is a narrow one, and one which unscrupulous people can easily cross; hut this exposedness of the patentee to fraud results from the fact that the patent, while it is of importance and of benefit to the public, is not of broad scope. To Mr. Justice Clifford’s construction of the patent neither party made objection upon the trial of this motion.

The motion is denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Austin Cornelius, Appellant.

Submitted May 14, 2012;

decided May 31, 2012

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Richard M. Greenberg, Esq., Office of the Appellate Defender, 11 Park Place, Suite 1601, New York, NY 10007 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Bangor
Hydro's Form 10-K for 12/31/97 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000009548
<NAME> BANGOR HYDRO-ELECTRIC COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      244,414
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     44,339
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          33,443
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       278,387
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 600,583
<COMMON>                                        36,817
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       56,970
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             12,771
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 106,558
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            9,137
<PREFERRED>                                      4,734
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           221,643
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                       34,000
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   50,578
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                        1,594
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 172,339
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  600,583
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      187,324
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           (1,956)
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     165,491
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     163,535
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         23,789
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               1,292
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  25,081
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        25,467
<NET-INCOME>                                     (386)
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      1,376
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  (1,762)
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       22,638
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          36,373
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.24)
        

</TABLE>
*+ , I . . . . , . . > 

. -,_.+ * - . . . -. - 7,- . -.-. . .., - , . . 

,- > - .. .,. , . -- -- .- . - .. .>-_ .I .>. . L '", . , . ,. -, ,- ,,. - 

. .-. I... . .. . ,, . ..
##### 



Exhibit 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-51085 and 333-106772 of Arizona Public Service Company on Form S-3 and in
Registration Statement 333-46161 of Arizona Public Service Company on Form S-8
of our report dated March 11, 2004 (which report expresses an unqualified
opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs relating to the change in 2003 in
the method of accounting for non-trading derivatives in order to comply with the
provisions of Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 03-11, Reporting Realized
Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments That Are Subject to FASB Statement
No. 133 and Not Held for Trading Purposes as Defined in Issue No.
02-3, and to
the change in 2001 in the method of accounting for derivatives and hedging
activities in order to comply with the provisions of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Arizona Public
Service Company for the year ended December 31, 2003.



DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
 
Phoenix, Arizona
March 11, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 112 (Friday, June 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13717]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE


 Announcement of the Fall 2009 Annual Grant Competition Effective 
October 1, 2009

AGENCY: United States Institute of Peace.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Agency announces its Annual Grant Competition, which 
offers support for research, education and training, and the 
dissemination of information on international peace and conflict 
resolution. The Annual Grant Competition is open to any project that 
falls within the Institute's broad mandate of international conflict 
resolution.
    Deadline: October 1, 2009.
    NEW Online application available: http://www.usip.org/grants/.

DATES: Submission of Application: October 1, 2009. Notification Date: 
March 31, 2010.

ADDRESSES: United States Institute of Peace, Grant Program, 1200 17th 
Street, NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20036-3011, (202) 429-3842 
(phone), (202) 833-1018 (fax), (202) 457-1719 (TTY), E-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#046376656a70774471776d742a6b7663"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4a2d382b243e390a3f39233a6425382d">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Grant Program--Annual Grant 
Competition, Phone (202)-429-3842, E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9cfbeefdf2e8efdce9eff5ecb2f3eefb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e38491828d9790a396908a93cd8c9184">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: June 8, 2009.
 Michael Graham,
Vice President for Management.
[FR Doc. E9-13717 Filed 6-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-AR-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,856]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on April 28, 2009 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of V & E Components, Inc., High Point, North Carolina.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of May 2009.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of  Trade Adjustment Assistance.  

[FR Doc. E9-13911 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
________________ 

BULLETIN 

________________ 

No. 2013 – 01 January 4, 2013 

Subject: Agreed-Upon Procedures reports 

This Bulletin provides guidance on the requirements for submitting annual Agreed-Upon 

Procedures reports (AUP reports) to the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC). 

AUP reports are assessments to verify whether a gaming operation is in compliance with 

the NIGC’s Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS) contained in 25 CFR part 543, 

and/or a Tribe’s Internal Control Standards (TICS) or System of Internal Control 

Standards (SICS) if they provide at least the same level of controls as the MICS. See 25 

C.F.R. § 543.23(d). The AUP reports for Class II gaming must be prepared by a Certified 

Public Accountant (CPA) and submitted to the NIGC within 120 days of the gaming 

operation’s fiscal year end. 25 C.F.R. § 543.23(d)(2). 

In light of the D.C. Circuit court’s decision in Colorado River Indian Tribes v. National 

Indian Gaming Commission 383 F.Supp.2d 123 (D.D.C. 2005), affd., 466 F.3d 134 (D.C. 

Cir. 2006), AUP report requirements for Class III MICS are not enforceable. 

As a convenience to gaming operations that conduct both Class II and Class III gaming, 

the NIGC will continue to accept combined AUP reports covering both Class II and Class 

III gaming. However, the assessment of the Class II components included in a combined 

report must be performed in accordance with section 543.23(d).
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Lawrence Stumbaugh, certify that:

      1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of
AssuranceAmerica Corporation.;

      2.    Based on my knowledge, this annual 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
annual report;

      3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

      4.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

            a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

            b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

            c)    presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

      5.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

            a)    all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant'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 registrant's internal
controls; and

      6.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in
this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: March 30, 2005

/s/ Lawrence Stumbaugh
-------------------------
Lawrence Stumbaugh
Chief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Village of Horseheads, Appellant, and Horseheads Police Benevolent Association, Inc., Respondent.

Submitted May 21, 2012;

decided June 12, 2012

Motion for leave to appeal denied. Motion for stay relief denied.
97-116.

#### In re Writ of Procedendo for State ex rel. Fisher v. Sandusky Cty. Court of Common Pleas.

In Procedendo. On answer of respondent. Answer treated as motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.