alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                             EXHIBIT (3)(a)(ii)

                          CERTIFICATE  OF  AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                    RESTATED  CERTIFICATE  OF  INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                           ANTHONY  INDUSTRIES,  INC.



   It is hereby certified that:

       1.  The name of the corporation (hereinafter called the "Company") is
ANTHONY  INDUSTRIES,  INC.

       2.  The name under which the Company was originally incorporated is
ANTHONY  POOLS,  INC., and the date of filing of the original certificate of
incorporation of the Company with the Secretary of State of the State of
Delaware is September 15, 1959.

       3.  The provisions of the certificate of incorporation as amended and/or
supplemented were restated and integrated into a single instrument entitled
"Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Anthony Industries, Inc.", filed with
the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on May 12, 1989.

       4.  The Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company is hereby
amended by striking out Article THIRTEENTH thereof and by substituting in lieu
of said Article the following new Article:

           "THIRTEENTH:  The Board of Directors shall be divided into three
       classes.  Directors in each class shall be elected to hold office until
       the third annual meeting of stockholders following their election.  The
       Board of Directors shall consist of from six to nine directors, with the
       actual number constituting the whole Board, and the number of directors
       in each class, being set from time to time by action of the Board of
       Directors; provided, however, that no decrease in the number of directors
       constituting the whole Board or the number of directors in any class may
       shorten the term of any incumbent director."

                                      -1-
<PAGE>
 
       5.  The amendment of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation herein
certified has been duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of Section 242
of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

       Signed and attested to on May 31, 1995.


                                 /s/ M. E. Lane
                                 ___________________________________
                                 M. E. Lane
                                 Vice President



ATTEST:


/s/ Susan E. McConnell
_________________________________
Susan E. McConnell
Secretary
 

                                      -2-
#### A. E. STALEY MFG. CO. v. KIPTON ELEVATOR ASS’N.

Civil Action No. 25333.

District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D.

April 30, 1948.

Louis S. Peirce, of Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff.

Harold S. Ewing, of Elyria, Ohio, for defendant.

JONES, District Judge.

The complaint, consisting of two paragraphs, is based upon an account.

Defendant’s motion seeks a more definite statement with respect to the nature of the obligation incurred and, if a contract, the nature and terms thereof.

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 12(e), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, provides for the granting of motions for more definite statements “if a pleading * * * is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading * *

It does not appear that the complaint is vague and ambiguous as to its allegations. In fact, it would seem to simply and briefly state the plaintiff’s claim. Details of transactions may be elicited through other procedure or discovery processes provided by the rules of Civil Procedure.

The motion will be denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Investment Plan Committee
Amdel Inc. Employee Investment Plan:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No.
2-49321) on Form S-8 of FINA, Inc. of our report dated April 17, 1998, relating
to the statements of net assets available for plan benefits of the Amdel Inc.
Employee Investment Plan as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and the related
statements of changes in net assets available for plan benefits for years then
ended, and the related supplemental schedule, which report appears in the
December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 11-K of the Amdel Inc. Employee
Investment Plan.




                                                           KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Dallas, Texas
April 30, 1998
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 4, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
135115 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan WALTER RIEPEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 135115 COA: 275413 WCAC: 95-000907 KELSEY HAYES COMPANY - MILFORD, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 11, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

l0528 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.

June 4, 2008

Clerk
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Hybred International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gary Kouletas, President of the Company, respectfully certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2004, that:



The Report fully complies with the requirements of the 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 and result of operations of the Company.









/s/ Gary Kouletas

Gary Kouletas

President (Principal Executive Officer)





Date: November 9, 2009



This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Hybred International, Inc. and will be retained by Hybred International, Inc.. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3325 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3325

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the waiver of the 
  collection of copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits of 
                   veterans, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 6, 2010

  Mr. Begich (for himself and Mr. Grassley) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the waiver of the 
  collection of copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits of 
                   veterans, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO WAIVE COLLECTION OF COPAYMENTS FOR TELEHEALTH 
              AND TELEMEDICINE VISITS OF VETERANS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter III of chapter 17 of title 38, United 
States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1722A the following 
new section:
``Sec. 1722B. Copayments: waiver of collection of copayments for 
              telehealth and telemedicine visits of veterans
    ``The Secretary may waive the imposition or collection of 
copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits of veterans under the 
laws administered by the Secretary.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 17 of such title is amended by inserting after the item 
relating to section 1722A the following new item:

``1722B. Copayments: waiver of collection of copayments for telehealth 
                            and telemedicine visits of veterans.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Iris Legum, Appellant, v Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

[821 NYS2d 895]

In an action, inter alia, to recover under an insurance policy in connection with a claim of damage to the plaintiffs automobile, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), dated November 18, 2005, as, upon reargument, adhered to its prior determination denying her prior motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability with respect to the second and third causes of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, “[insurance Law § 3420 (d) is inapplicable to this case since the underlying claim does not involve death or bodily injury” *(Incorporated Vil. of Pleasantville v Calvert Ins. Co.,*204 AD2d 689, 690 [1994]; *see Fairmont Funding v Utica Mut. Ins. Co.,*264 AD2d 581 [1999]). Thus, the defendant’s delay—even assuming it was unreasonable—will not estop the insurer from disclaiming unless the insured has suffered prejudice by virtue of the insurer’s conduct *(see Corcoran v Abbott Sommers, Inc.,*143 AD2d 874, 876 [1988]; *Fairmont Funding v Utica Mut. Ins. Co., supra*at 581-582).

On this record, we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that the plaintiff failed to make the requisite prima facie showing of prejudice *(see Vecchiarelli v Continental Ins. Co.,*277 AD2d 992 [2000]; *United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v Weiri,*265 *671AD2d 321 [1999]; *Fairmont Funding v Utica Mut. Ins. Co., supra; compare with State Farm Ins. Co. v O’Brien,*242 AD2d 381 [1997]) and, therefore, was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law *(see Ayotte v Gervasio,*81 NY2d 1062 [1993]).

In light of our determination, we do not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Florio, J.P., Goldstein, Mastro and Fisher, JJ., concur.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TORRIS BERNARD HILL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-1854 

[May 27, 2021]

Appeal of order denying 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the 

Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County; Sherwood Bauer, Jr., Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 432003CF001639A.

Torris B. Hill, Arcadia, pro se. 

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Luke Napodano, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., WARNER and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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 Heavenly Hot Dogs, Inc. (the ACompany@) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Elwood Shepard, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:  (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.  Date: July 25, 2007 By: /s/  Elwood Shepard Elwood Shepard Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 4.11
  
  Terms of appointment as non-executive director
 Bank
 Disclosure of interests and other relevant information
  APRA
 Remuneration and expenses
 NEDSP




---



##### 



Term of appointment and vacation of office
       Board meetings




---



##### 



Board committees
  Time commitment envisaged
   Indemnity, insurance and access to Bank documents
  Charters and policies
  
    
    Board charter;
    
    Board Corporate Governance Guidelines;
    
    The Banks Constitution;
    
    Securities trading guidelines;
    
    Guidelines for communication between the Bank and shareholders;
    
    Taking of independent professional advice by directors;
    
    Code of ethics entitled Statement of Professional Practice;
    
    External Auditor Services Policy;
    
    Equal Employment Opportunity Policy; and
    
    Occupational Health and Safety Systems.
  Notification of interests to ASX




---



##### 



Continuing education arrangements
       John M Schubert
 Acknowledgment
  /s/ Colin Galbraith
    
    06/08/05Signature
    
    Date
Plan Document
 ARMSTRONG
NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
   1. DEFINITIONS
 1.1 Account
 1.2 Administrator
 1.3 Beneficiary
 1.4 Board
 1.5 Bonus
 1.6 Change in Control




---



##### 



1.7 Code
 1.8 Corporation
 1.9 Company
 1.10 Compensation




---



##### 



1.11 Director Deferrals
 1.12 Director Deferral Account
 1.13 Effective Date
 1.14 Excess Compensation
 1.15 Investment Funds
 1.16 Participant
 1.17 Plan
 1.18 Plan Year
 1.19 Qualified Plan
 1.20 Restoration Bonus Deferrals
 1.21 Restoration Deferral Account
 1.22 Restoration Matching Credits
 1.23 Restoration Matching Account




---



##### 



1.24 Restoration Salary Deferrals
 1.25 Retirement Supplement Credits
 1.26 Retirement Supplement Account
 1.27 Termination
 1.28 Unforeseeable Emergency
 1.29 Valuation Date
 2. ELIGIBILITY AND PARTICIPATION
 2.1 Eligibility for Participation:




---



##### 



2.2 Commencement of Participation:
      2.3 Cessation of Participation:
    3. DEFERRAL OF COMPENSATION
 3.1 Restoration Salary Deferrals
 3.2 Restoration Bonus Deferrals:
 3.3 Director Deferrals:




---



##### 



3.4 First Year of Eligibility:
 4. EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS
 4.1 Restoration Matching Credits:
 4.2 Retirement Supplement Credits:
 5. INVESTMENT OF CONTRIBUTION
 5.1 Establishment of Accounts:
      5.2 Obligation of the Company:
 5.3 Establishment of Investment Funds:




---



##### 



5.4 Crediting Investment Results:
 6. PAYMENT AND AMOUNT OF BENEFITS
 6.1 Form of Distribution:
       6.2 Time of Distribution:




---



##### 



6.3 Change in Control Election:
 6.4 Change in Form or Time of Distribution:
 6.5 Distribution after Death:
 6.6 De Minimis Distributions:
 6.7 Distribution Due to Unforeseeable Emergency:




---



##### 



6.8 Termination for Willful, Deliberate or Gross Misconduct:
 7. FINANCING
  8. AMENDMENT OR TERMINATION
 8.1 Plan Amendment:
 8.2 Termination of the Plan:
 9. ADMINISTRATION
 9.1 Administration:
 9.2 Plan Expenses:




---



##### 



9.3 Liability:
 10. CLAIMS PROCEDURE
 10.1 Claim:
 10.2 Denial of Claim:
    10.3 Review of Claim:
 10.4 Final Decision:
 10.5 Attorneys Fees and Expenses:
 10.6 Interest on Delayed Payments:




---



##### 



11. MISCELLANEOUS
 11.1 Non-Alienation of Benefits:
 11.2 Limitation of Rights:
   11.3 Participants Rights Unsecured:
 11.4 Incapacity:
 11.5 Withholding:
 11.6 Severability:
 11.7 Controlling Law:




---



##### 



Eileen Beck
    
    Thomas MangasWilliam Rodruan
    
    Jeffrey Nickel
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3345 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to remove the cap on punitive 

damages established by the Supreme Court in Exxon Shipping Company 

v. Baker. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 11, 2010 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself, Mr. MENENDEZ, and Mr. LEAHY) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to remove the cap 

on punitive damages established by the Supreme Court 

in Exxon Shipping Company v. Baker. 

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 ‘‘Big Oil Polluter Pays 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds that— 

8 (1) in the case styled Exxon Shipping Co. v 

9 Baker, 128 S. Ct. 2605 (2008), the Supreme Court 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3345 IS

1 held that when reviewing jury awards for punitive 

2 damages under maritime law, courts should limit the 

3 punitive-to-compensatory damages ratio to 1:1; 

4 (2) in that decision, the Court conceded that 

5 discretion to award punitive damages has not mass6 produced runaway awards, and although some stud7 ies show the dollar amounts of punitive-damages 

8 awards growing over time, even in real terms, by 

9 most accounts the median ratio of punitive-to-com10 pensatory awards has remained less than 1:1; 

11 (3) district and appellate courts have the au12 thority under common law to reduce excessively 

13 large punitive awards; and 

14 (4) punitive damages serve to punish reckless 

15 or worse behavior, deter future similar offenses, and 

16 compensate for intangible injuries that would not 

17 otherwise be available to 1 or more plaintiffs. 

18 SEC. 3. REMOVAL OF CAP FOR MARITIME PUNITIVE DAM19 AGES. 

20 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 301 of title 46, United 

21 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol22 lowing: 

23 ‘‘§ 30107. Punitive damages in maritime law 

24 ‘‘In a civil action for damages arising out of a mari25 time tort, punitive damages may be assessed without reVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:55 May 12, 2010 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3345.IS S3345

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3345 IS

1 gard to the amount of compensatory damages assessed in 

2 the action.’’. 

3 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The analysis for 

4 chapter 301 of title 46, United States Code, is amended 

5 by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘Sec. 30107. Punitive damages in maritime law.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             868
<SECURITIES>                                       162
<RECEIVABLES>                                   52,584
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,981
<PP&E>                                         499,743
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,233
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 548,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          265,866
<BONDS>                                        200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       844,542
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   548,491
<SALES>                                        100,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,000
<CGS>                                           70,121
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   79,795
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,591
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                33,107
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (41,507)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (41,507)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,507)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.006)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>RESULT WOULD BE ANTI-DILUTIVE DUE TO LOSS
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23(ii)

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

            We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-3, No. 333-26769) of Medicore, Inc. and in the related
Prospectus of our report dated March 10, 2000, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Medicore, Inc. for the year ended December
31, 1999 included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December
31, 1999, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                                     /s/ WISS & COMPANY, LLP
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Wiss & Company, LLP


March 29, 2000
Livingston, New Jersey
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-20558

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARLOS MARQUEZ-HERNANDEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-13-1

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

February 21, 2002

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos

Marquez-Hernandez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Marquez-Hernandez has not filed a response. Our independent

review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous

issue. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,

and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.