alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          41,786
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    310,651
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          14,299
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           325,320
<LOANS>                                      1,286,465
<ALLOWANCE>                                     19,854
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,679,764
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,323,992
<SHORT-TERM>                                   176,653
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             20,053
<LONG-TERM>                                     35,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           112
<OTHER-SE>                                     123,954
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,679,764
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 28,566
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,963
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                33,529
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              14,532
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,714
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           16,283
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,785
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               (144)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  7,356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,434
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       7,434
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,509
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.51
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.85
<LOANS-NON>                                     13,320
<LOANS-PAST>                                       213
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                19,207
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,469
<RECOVERIES>                                       331
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               19,854
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            19,854
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, Michael Y. McGovern, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Pioneer Companies, Inc. (the“registrant”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the periods presented in this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15(d)-15(e)) for the registrant and 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 report is being prepared;  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, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; 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;and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarizeand report financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.    Date: November 14, 2005     /s/ Michael Y. McGovern  Michael Y. McGovern  President and Chief Executive Officer
[No. 34339-8-II.

Division Two.

August 21, 2007.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Covell Paul Thomas, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 99-1-00397-9, Serjio Armijo, J., entered January 20, 2006. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per QuinnBrintnall, J., concurred in by Houghton, C.J., and Van Deren, J.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2391

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish in the Department

of Veterans Affairs a Women’s Bureau.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 10, 1993

Ms. WATERS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish in the

Department of Veterans Affairs a Women’s Bureau.

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

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF WOMEN’S BUREAU IN THE

4 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 3 of title 38, United

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the follow7 ing new section:

8 ‘‘§ 318. Women’s Bureau

9 ‘‘(a) There shall be in the Department a bureau to

10 be known as the Women’s Bureau. The bureau shall be
2

•HR 2391 IH

1 headed by a Director. The Director shall foster and pro2 mote standards and policies of the Department to improve

3 the welfare of veterans who are women.

4 ‘‘(b) The Director may assist in the development of

5 policies providing benefits and other services to veterans

6 who are women and to the dependents and beneficiaries

7 of those veterans.

8 ‘‘(c) The Director may investigate and report to the

9 Secretary upon all matters pertaining to the welfare of

10 veterans who are women. Other responsibilities of the Di11 rector shall be—

12 ‘‘(1) to provide outreach to veterans who are

13 women;

14 ‘‘(2) to act as a resource for, and provide con15 sultative services to, women veterans coordinators;

16 and

17 ‘‘(3) to provide oversight of all programs of the

18 Department applicable specifically or particularly to

19 veterans who are women, including well women clin20 ics, sexual trauma programs, and the women veter21 ans coordinator program.

22 ‘‘(d) The Director shall appoint an assistant Director

23 who shall perform such duties as shall be prescribed by

24 the Director and approved by the Secretary.’’.
3

•HR 2391 IH

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

2 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding

3 at the end the following new item:

‘‘318. Women’s Bureau.’’.

Æ
#### Stephanie McREVY, Samantha Mulkey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Stephen Blake RYAN, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-11387

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Dec. 14, 2010.

Troy R. Keller, Metairie, LA, Stephen Wright Mullins, Luckey & Mullins, PLLC, Ocean Springs, MS, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Ryan Thomas Northrup, Stewart Howard, P.C., James Taylor Patterson, Mobile, AL, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before BLACK, WILSON and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Stephanie McRevy and Samantha Mulkey appeal the denial of their motion for a new trial and alternative motion for additur, claiming that the jury’s damage award in this case was either inconsistent with the evidence or inadequate under Alabama law. After a careful review of the record in this case and the briefs filed on appeal, we conclude that the district court’s denial of these motions was without reversible error.

After a trial on appellants’ negligence claim against the defendant, the jury returned a general verdict in favor of appellants and awarded each of them damages in the amount of $5,000. Appellants assert that these awards were entirely disproportionate to their injury, relying on a case that holds that the amount of damages must be at least as high as the uncontradicted special damages, as well as an amount sufficient to make any compensation for páin and suffering. *See Brown v. Foster,*636 So.2d 468, 469 (Ala.Civ.App.1994).

In denying appellants’ post-trial motions, however, the district court held that the evidence at trial as to the extent of *401appellants injuries and the amount of their damages was conflicting. Therefore, he concluded that the amount of special damages was not “uncontradicted.” Our review of the record supports this conclusion. The opinion testimony of plaintiffs’ witnesses as to special damages including the extent of their injuries, causation of their medical conditions, and other claims was vigorously questioned on cross-examination. The jury was not required to credit all that was opined.

Accordingly, the *Brown*case is inapposite and the district court’s conclusion that the motions for new trial or for additur should be denied was not error. *See Hawkes v. Ayers,*537 F.2d 836, 837 (5th Cir.1976).

Accordingly, the denial of the motions for new trial or for additur is

AFFIRMED.
#### Nkuma Uche, Appellant, v Gary Stevens et al., Respondents.

[610 NYS2d 917]

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated at Supreme Court, Galloway, J. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Galloway, J. — Dismiss Complaint.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Callahan, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.
# State Enrollment Report
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 Annual Report of The National Bank of Indianapolis
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2006
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Morris L. Maurer, Chief Executive 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:


     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.





/s/ Morris L. Maurer
-----------------------------------
Morris L. Maurer
Chief Executive Officer
March 23, 2007



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and not for any other purpose, and is subject to the knowledge
standard contained in 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS RESTATED FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM 10-Q OF ALUMAX INC. FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                              24
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      538
<ALLOWANCES>                                        25
<INVENTORY>                                        614
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,396
<PP&E>                                           3,115
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,066
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,617
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              827
<BONDS>                                            693
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          2
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,569
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,617
<SALES>                                          1,654
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,654
<CGS>                                            1,312
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,515
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  34
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    292
<INCOME-TAX>                                       113
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                292
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       179
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.23




</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-QSB
for the nine months ended September 30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          66,959
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               161,084
<PP&E>                                       1,900,000<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,766,658
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,781,838
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,019,995
<COMMON>                                       228,479
<OTHER-SE>                                  (7,013,996)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,766,658
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,385,977<F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             911,132<F3>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,301,096)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (2,301,096)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.13)


<FN>
<F1> Consists of $1,900,000 of property and equipment held for sale [ Tag # 16 ]

<F2> Other expense includes approximately $409,000 of non-cash expenses
     related to the amortization of warrants and stock based compensation
     [ Tag # 30 ]

<F3> Interest expense includes $632,875 of amortization of debt discount and
     expenses, a non-cash item [ Tag # 32 ]
</FN>



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2311 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2311

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit nonparty 
   multicandidate political committee contributions in elections for 
                            Federal office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 27, 1993

Mr. Gilchrest introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit nonparty 
   multicandidate political committee contributions in elections for 
                            Federal office.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY NONPARTY MULTICANDIDATE 
              POLITICAL COMMITTEES IN ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL OFFICE.

    Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
441a) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(i)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no 
nonparty multicandidate political committee may make any contribution 
to a candidate for Federal office.
    ``(2) As used in this subsection, the term `multicandidate 
political committee' has the meaning given that term in subsection 
(a)(4).''.

                                 <all>
```
#### COASTAL EAGLE POINT OIL COMPANY, PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT, v. WEST DEPTFORD TOWNSHIP, DEFENDANT/APPELLANT. COASTAL EAGLE POINT OIL COMPANY, PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT, v. WESTVILLE BOROUGH, DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division

Submitted April 12, 1995

Decided May 23, 1995.

Before Judges SHEBELL, SKILLMAN and WALLACE.

*Edward G. Rosenblum*argued the cause for appellants *(Rosen-blum Wolf & Lloyd,*attorneys; *Mr. Rosenblum,*on the brief).

*Seth I. Davenport*argued the cause for respondent *(Garippa & Davenport,*attorneys; *John E. Garippa*and *Mr. Davenport,*of counsel and on the brief; *Charles J. Harrington,*III, on the brief).

PER CURIAM.

This appeal concerns the valuation for tax assessment purposes of the Coastal Eagle Point Oil Refinery complex located in West Deptford Township and the Borough of Westville. Defendant municipalities appeal from the final judgment of the Tax Court reducing the valuation of plaintiff’s refinery for the tax years 1985, 1986 and 1987. The Tax Court endorsed plaintiffs market sale *191approach to valuation, determined that the sale of the refinery from Texaco Inc. to plaintiff for $42.5 million constituted the best evidence of its true value for tax assessment purposes, and lowered the tax assessments for all three years.

We have carefully reviewed this record in light of the contentions advanced by defendants and have concluded that there is no warrant for our intervention. We affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Lario in his thorough written opinion dated March 31, 1993, reported at 13 *N.J.Tax*242 (Tax 1993).

Affirmed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 216

To amend title 38, United States Code, to permit the next of kin of a

deceased veteran to designate the style of flag to be furnished at the

burial of such veteran.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. JACOBS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to permit the next

of kin of a deceased veteran to designate the style of

flag to be furnished at the burial of such veteran.

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

3 That section 2301(a) of title 38, United States Code, is

4 amended—

5 (1)(A) by redesignating subparagraph (A)

6 through (C) as clause (i) through (iii), respectively;

7 and

8 (B) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as

9 subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
2

•HR 216 IH

1 (2) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(a)’’;

2 (3) in paragraph (1), as designated by para3 graph (2) of this section, by striking out ‘‘to drape

4 the casket of’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘, of the

5 style designated under paragraph (2), with respect

6 to’’; and

7 (4) by adding at the end thereof the following

8 new paragraph:

9 ‘‘(2) The flag furnished under paragraph (1) shall

10 be—

11 ‘‘(A) a flag to drape the casket of the deceased

12 veteran involved; or

13 ‘‘(B) a flag of a size determined by the Sec14 retary to be appropriate for mounting and display on

15 an interior or exterior wall, together with such mate16 rials as the Secretary determines to be necessary for

17 such mounting and display;

18 as designated by the person entitled to receive such flag

19 under this section.’’.

Æ
FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 12, 2014

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD

AWARDS ANNUITY CONTRACT

Washington, D.C. -- The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment 

Board (FRTIB) announced today that it has awarded its life 

annuity contract to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 

(MetLife). The Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act 

describes the annuity methods that are required to be made 

available to eligible Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) participants and 

spousal beneficiaries. There are eighteen annuity options and 

two annuity methods (single life and joint life). TSP 

participants may elect to use all or a portion of the proceeds 

of their TSP account to purchase an annuity. Account balances 

may consist of traditional contributions and earnings and Roth 

contributions and earnings (if the qualified distribution rules 

are met – participant is 591⁄2 or older and have Roth 

contributions for five years or more). Annuity purchases cannot 

combine traditional and Roth balances.

The annuity contract is for a performance period comprised of a 

three-year base period and one 2-year option period. 

The TSP is a retirement savings plan for Federal employees; it is similar to 

the 401(k) plans offered by many private employers. As of April 2014, TSP 

assets totaled approximately $405 billion, and retirement savings accounts 

were being maintained for more than 4.6 million TSP participants. 

Participants include Federal civilian employees in all branches of 

Government, employees of the U.S. Postal Service, and members of the 

uniformed services. Additional information can be found at www.tsp.gov. 

MEDIA CONTACT:

Kim Weaver 

202-942-1641

(end)