alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-60297

Summary Calendar

GABRIEL ADRIAN GARCIA, also known as Gabriel Adrian Garcia Leal,

Petitioner

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A300 321 217

Before DeMOSS, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gabriel Adrian Garcia petitions for review of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals’s (BIA) dismissal of his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order 

denying his motion to reopen. He claims, without citing anything in the record 

before us, that the IJ erroneously concluded that the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS) could not exercise its prosecutorial discretion to terminate or 

defer his removal until he was ordered removed. Although he concedes that 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 3, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-60297 Document: 00512549123 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/03/2014
No. 13-60297

“DHS never indicated that it intended to exercise [its] discretion” in his case, 

Garcia nonetheless contends that he was denied due process because his 

circumstances warranted the exercise of prosecutorial discretion pursuant to a 

memorandum from John Morton, Director of Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE), that authorizes ICE attorneys to exercise prosecutorial 

discretion at any stage of the removal proceedings.

We review the decision of the BIA unless the IJ’s decision influenced the 

BIA’s decision. Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th Cir. 2002). Since the 

BIA adopted the IJ’s findings and conclusions, the IJ’s findings are reviewable. 

See id.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Garcia’s challenge to the exercise of 

DHS’s prosecutorial discretion to terminate or defer his removal. See 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1252(g). We have jurisdiction to review the denial of Garcia’s motion to 

reopen. See Nolos v. Holder, 611 F.3d 279, 281 (5th Cir. 2010). However, 

Garcia does not address the IJ’s finding that his motion to reopen was 

untimely, thereby waiving consideration of the issue. See 8 U.S.C. § 

1229a(c)(7)(C)(i); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(1); Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 

833 (5th Cir. 2003). To the extent that Garcia argues that the IJ should have 

reopened the removal proceeding via his sua sponte authority, we lack

jurisdiction to review the IJ’s wholly discretionary refusal to do so. RamosBonilla v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 216, 220 (5th Cir. 2008). Finally, Garcia cannot 

establish a due process violation related to his motion to reopen because “there 

is no liberty interest at stake in a motion to reopen.” Altamirano-Lopez v. 

Gonzales, 435 F.3d 547, 550 (5th Cir. 2006).

Garcia’s petition for review is DENIED in part and DISMISSED in part 

for lack of jurisdiction.

2

 Case: 13-60297 Document: 00512549123 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/03/2014
ERRATA FOR JCX-29-05 

(Historical Development and Present Law of the Federal Tax Exemption 

for Charities and Other Tax-Exempt Organizations) 

The following footnote should be inserted at the end of the first paragraph on page 1: 

“Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 

1986, as amended.” 

Figure 2, on page 23, should appear as follows: 

Percent of Returns by Type of Charitable Organization(1)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 19

IRC 501(c) subsection

Percent of Returns

1976

2004

(1) Excludes those organizations that account for fewer than one percent of returns. 

On the chart on page 31, the text in the box with respect to the row “501(c)(3)” and the 

column “Required to File Exemption Application” should read as follows: 

“Yes (except for certain organizations including churches and small organizations)”. 

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 

April 21, 2005 

JCX-32-05
M&I 2009 Sch A-10 F.Z11.XLS

12/22/2008

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

SCHEDULE OF ESTIMATED M&I PROJECT USE ENERGY COSTS

STORAGE, CONVEYANCE, AND OUT-OF-BASIN PUMPING

2009 M&I WATER RATES

Projected

2009 Storage Pumping SFU Conveyance Pumping 

Deliveries Columbia Folsom Gianelli WR Gianelli WR Dos Amigos O'Neill Jones 

Facility/Contractor (Sch. A-12) Mowry Pump Plant Pump-Gen Plt Pump-Gen Plt Pump Plant Pump-Gen Plt Pump PlaCross Valley Canal 4/

 County of Fresno County of Tulare Total CVCDelta-Mendota Canal Byron-Bethany ID 956 95 City of Tracy 9,411 9,41 Del Puerto WD 20 2 Department of Veterans Affairs 75 7 Panoche WD - DMC 26 2 San Luis WD - DMC 180 18 Total DMC 10,668 10,66Delta-Mendota Exchange 71,149 71,14

Folsom Dam & Reservoir

 City of Roseville 31,285 31,285 Sacramento County WD 4,259 4,259 San Juan WD 6,610 6,610 Total Folsom D&R 42,154 42,154San Luis Canal - Fresno 1/ City of Avenal 2,834 1,984 2,834 2,834 2,83 City of Coalinga 7,614 5,330 7,614 7,614 7,61 City of Huron 1,147 803 1,147 1,147 1,14 State of CA 7 5 7 7  Westlands WD 3,020 2,114 3,020 3,020 3,02 Total SLC - Fresno 14,623 10,236 14,623 14,623 14,62San Luis Canal - Tracy 1/ Pacheco WD -SLC 12 9 12 12 1 Panoche WD - SLC 58 41 58 58 5 San Luis WD - SLC 620 434 31 2/ 620 62 Total SLC - Tracy 690 483 101 690 69
M&I 2009 Sch A-10 F.Z11.XLS 

12/22/2008 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

SCHEDULE OF ESTIMATED M&I PROJECT USE ENERGY COSTS

STORAGE, CONVEYANCE, AND OUT-OF-BASIN PUMPING

2009 M&I WATER RATES

Projected

2009 Storage Pumping SFU Conveyance Pumping 

Deliveries Columbia Folsom Gianelli WR Gianelli WR Dos Amigos O'Neill Jones 

Facility/Contractor (Sch. A-12) Mowry Pump Plant Pump-Gen Plt Pump-Gen Plt Pump Plant Pump-Gen Plt Pump PlaSan Felipe Unit

 San Benito County WD 4,934 4,934 4,934 4,93 Santa Clara Valley WD 96,039 96,039 96,039 96,03 Total SFU 100,973 100,973 100,973 100,97 Total Deliveries 240,258 42,154 10,719 100,973 14,724 116,286 198,10 Estimated 2009 Project Use Energy Costs $1,479 $29,689 $33,557 $316,102 $32,865 $119,918 $785,60 Less - Regeneration Credit 

 Gianelli WR Pump-Gen Plt ($27,035) O'Neill Pump-Gen Plt ($7,681)

 Net Project Use Energy Costs $6,522 $112,237
M&I 2009 Sch A-10 F.Z11.XLS

12/22/2008

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

SCHEDULE OF ESTIMATED M&I PROJECT USE ENERGY COSTS

STORAGE, CONVEYANCE, AND OUT-OF-BASIN PUMPING

2009 M&I WATER RATES

FOOTNOTES

1/ According to MP-2810 (CB 06/93) only 70% of San Luis Canal Deliveries are stored in B.F.Sisk San Luis Reservoir

and, therefore, require pumping by the WR Gianelli Pump-Generator.

2/ Excludes estimated San Luis WD deliveries before Dos Amigos. The calculation reflects the relationship between actual deliveries

versus actual exclusions over a five year period ( 620 - 589 = 31 ) Refer to M&I 2009 Sch. A-11.Z11.xls.

3/ Only 50% of Santa Clara Valley WD's deliveries require pumping through Coyote PP.4/ Cross Valley Canal costs for the Dos Amigos PP PUE O&M will be included under direct pumping (see Schedule A-11).
Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Avantogen Oncology, Inc., on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Angela Bronow Davanzo, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 results of operations of the Company.



Date: November 10, 2006By:

/s/ Angela Bronow DavanzoAngela Bronow DavanzoChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
(February 14, 1949.)

#### Frank Pipitone, Appellant, v. Standard Fruit & Steamship Company, Respondent.

*672Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and MaeCrate, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 30, 2012 

y0123 

Order 

 

January 30, 2012 

143022 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143022 

 COA: 298628 

BOBIE LANELL GEORGE, Wayne CC: 94-012633-FC 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 18, 2011 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
### Subpart D—General Provisions

Sec.
1397C.
Enterprise zone business defined.
1397D.
Qualified zone property defined.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2000**—Pub. L. 106–554, §1(a)(7) [title I, §116(a)(1), (b)(7)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–602, 2763A–604, redesignated subpart C of this part as this subpart and items for sections 1397B and 1397C as 1397C and 1397D, respectively.
### §611. Allowance of deduction for depletion

#### (a) General rule

In the case of mines, oil and gas wells, other natural deposits, and timber, there shall be allowed as a deduction in computing taxable income a reasonable allowance for depletion and for depreciation of improvements, according to the peculiar conditions in each case; such reasonable allowance in all cases to be made under regulations prescribed by the Secretary. For purposes of this part, the term "mines" includes deposits of waste or residue, the extraction of ores or minerals from which is treated as mining under section 613(c). In any case in which it is ascertained as a result of operations or of development work that the recoverable units are greater or less than the prior estimate thereof, then such prior estimate (but not the basis for depletion) shall be revised and the allowance under this section for subsequent taxable years shall be based on such revised estimate.

#### (b) Special rules

#### (1) Leases

In the case of a lease, the deduction under this section shall be equitably apportioned between the lessor and lessee.

#### (2) Life tenant and remainderman

In the case of property held by one person for life with remainder to another person, the deduction under this section shall be computed as if the life tenant were the absolute owner of the property and shall be allowed to the life tenant.

#### (3) Property held in trust

In the case of property held in trust, the deduction under this section shall be apportioned between the income beneficiaries and the trustee in accordance with the pertinent provisions of the instrument creating the trust, or, in the absence of such provisions, on the basis of the trust income allocable to each.

#### (4) Property held by estate

In the case of an estate, the deduction under this section shall be apportioned between the estate and the heirs, legatees, and devisees on the basis of the income of the estate allocable to each.

#### (c) Cross reference

**For other rules applicable to depreciation of improvements, see section 167.**

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 207; Pub. L. 85–866, title I, §35, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1632; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".

1958—Subsec. (d)(4). Pub. L. 85–866 substituted "devisees" for "devises".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1958 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 85–866 applicable to taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 1953, and ending after Aug. 16, 1954, see section 1(c)(1) of Pub. L. 85–866, set out as a note under section 165 of this title.
§ 102.32 Notice of court-ordered and emergency disclosures. ( a ) *Court-ordered disclosures.* When a record pertaining to an individual is required to be disclosed by order of a court of competent jurisdiction, the office that maintains the record shall make reasonable efforts to provide notice of this to the individual. Notice shall be given within a reasonable time after the office's receipt of the order, except that in a case in which the order is not a matter of public record, the notice shall be given only after the order becomes public. This notice shall be mailed to the individual's last known address and shall contain a copy of the order and a description of the information disclosed. Notice shall not be given if disclosure is made from a criminal law enforcement system of records that has been exempted from the notice requirement.
( b ) *Emergency disclosures.* Upon disclosing a record pertaining to an individual made under compelling circumstances affecting health or safety, the office shall notify that individual of the disclosure. This notice shall be mailed to the individual's last known address and shall state the nature of the information disclosed; the person, organization, or agency to which it was disclosed; the date of disclosure; and the compelling circumstances justifying the disclosure.
### §7514. Authority to prescribe or modify seals

The Secretary is authorized to prescribe or modify seals of office for the district directors of internal revenue and other officers or employees of the Treasury Department to whom any of the functions of the Secretary of the Treasury shall have been or may be delegated. Each seal so prescribed shall contain such device as the Secretary may select. Each seal shall remain in the custody of any officer or employee whom the Secretary may designate, and, in accordance with the regulations approved by the Secretary, may be affixed in lieu of the seal of the Treasury Department to any certificate or attestation (except for material to be published in the Federal Register) that may be required of such officer or employee. Judicial notice shall be taken of any seal prescribed in accordance with this authority, a facsimile of which has been published in the Federal Register together with the regulations prescribing such seal and the affixation thereof.

(Added Pub. L. 85–866, title I, §91(a), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1667; amended Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), (M), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834, 1835.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–455 substituted "functions of the Secretary of the Treasury" for "functions of the Secretary" after "whom any of the" and struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary" wherever appearing.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Aug. 17, 1954, see section 1(c) of Pub. L. 85–866, set out as an Effective Date of 1958 Amendment note under section 165 of this title.
### §388. Claims for damages; settlement by agreement

The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to pay out of funds available for the Indian irrigation projects for damages caused to owners of lands or other private property of any kind by reason of the operations of the United States, its officers or employees, in the survey, construction, operation, or maintenance of irrigation works of such projects and which may be compromised by agreement between the claimant and the Secretary of the Interior or such officers as he may designate: Provided, That the total of any such claims authorized to be settled as herein contemplated shall not exceed 5 per centum of the funds available for the project under which such claims arise during any one fiscal year.

(Feb. 20, 1929, ch. 279, 45 Stat. 1252.)
### §4471. Imposition of tax

#### (a) In general

There is hereby imposed a tax of $3 per passenger on a covered voyage.

#### (b) By whom paid

The tax imposed by this section shall be paid by the person providing the covered voyage.

#### (c) Time of imposition

The tax imposed by this section shall be imposed only once for each passenger on a covered voyage, either at the time of first embarkation or disembarkation in the United States.

(Added Pub. L. 101–239, title VII, §7504(a), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2362.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 4471 was contained in subchapter C of this chapter prior to repeal by Pub. L. 89–44, title IV, §404, June 21, 1965, 79 Stat. 149.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 101–239, title VII, §7504(c), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2363, provided that:

"(1) In general.—The amendments made by this section [enacting this subchapter] shall apply to voyages beginning after December 31, 1989, which were not paid for before such date.

"(2) No deposits required before april 1, 1990.—No deposit of any tax imposed by subchapter B of chapter 36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by this section, shall be required to be made before April 1, 1990."
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No.: 0:20-cv-61023-RAR-Ruiz

MATTHEW BUCKLEY and

TOP GUN OPTIONS, LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

EMMETT MOORE and 

TRADINGSCHOOLS.ORG,

 Defendants.

 /

DECLARATION OF SUSANNE ARANI

1. I, Susanne Arani, declare pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1746, under penalty of perjury 

that the following is true and correct:

2. I am one of the attorneys acting as counsel for Defendants Emmett Moore and 

tradingschools.org (“Defendants”) in the above-captioned matter, and I have been admitted to 

this Court pro hac vice.

3. I am submitting this declaration in support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to 

Rule 12(b)(6).

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of an online article entitled, “Top 

Gun Options: A Paper Tiger?,” published on or about June 8, 2017, online at 

https://www.tradingschools.org/reviews/top-gun-options/, last accessed and printed on or about 

September 14, 2020.

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the pre-suit notice letter sent in 

Case 0:20-cv-61023-RAR Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

Rendon v. Bloomberg, L.P., 403 F. Supp. 3d 1269 (S.D. Fla. 2019), which was attached in 

defendants’ motion to dismiss as ECF No. 52-1, at pp. 99-101, as Exhibit 19.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the 

State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed November 10, 2020, at Vista California.

Susanne Arani, Esq. /s/Susanne Arani

(Signature)

Case 0:20-cv-61023-RAR Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2020 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 475 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 475

To amend title 5, United States Code, to designate Juneteenth National 
              Independence Day as a legal public holiday.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 25, 2021

Mr. Markey (for himself, Mr. Booker, Ms. Smith, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Schatz, 
   Mr. Burr, Ms. Hirono, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Rubio, Mrs. 
Feinstein, Mr. Hawley, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Sanders, Mrs. Fischer, 
   Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Lankford, Ms. Cortez Masto, Mr. Cassidy, Ms. 
 Warren, Mr. Risch, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Young, 
 Ms. Klobuchar, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Casey, Ms. Collins, Ms. Baldwin, 
 Mr. Portman, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Durbin, 
  Mr. Warner, Ms. Duckworth, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. King, Mr. Bennet, Mr. 
 Brown, Mr. Reed, Mr. Kaine, Mr. Coons, Mrs. Shaheen, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
 Peters, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Lujan, Ms. Stabenow, Ms. Sinema, 
Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Padilla) introduced the following 
    bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 5, United States Code, to designate Juneteenth National 
              Independence Day as a legal public holiday.

    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 ``Juneteenth National Independence Day 
Act''.

SEC. 2. JUNETEENTH NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE DAY AS A LEGAL PUBLIC HOLIDAY.

    Section 6103(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting after the item relating to Memorial Day the following:
            ``Juneteenth National Independence Day, June 19.''.
                                 <all>
```
### §898. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–197, §3(b), Dec. 22, 1973, 87 Stat. 770

Section, acts June 17, 1954, ch. 303, §9, 68 Stat. 252; Sept. 8, 1960, Pub. L. 86–733, §3, 74 Stat. 867, set forth conditions for tax exemptions for distributions, conveyances, and transfer of title to assets.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 159 (Friday, October 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 60389]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22816]


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

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION


Sunshine Act Notice; Farm Credit Administration Board; Regular 
Meeting

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the 
Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), of the regular meeting of the Farm 
Credit Administration Board (Board).

Date and Time: The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the 
offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on 
October 14, 2004, from 9 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes 
its business.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanette C. Brinkley, Secretary to the 
Farm Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056.

ADDRESSES: Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, 
Virginia 22102-5090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This meeting of the Board will be open to 
the public (limited space available). In order to increase the 
accessibility to Board meetings, persons requiring assistance should 
make arrangements in advance. The matters to be considered at the 
meeting are:

Open Session

A. Approval of Minutes

    <bullet> September 9, 2004 (Open and Closed)

B. Reports

    <bullet> International Volunteer Results

C. New Business--Regulations

    <bullet> Proposed Rule--Investments, Liquidity, and Divestiture
    <bullet> Proposed Rule--Borrower Rights

    Dated: October 5, 2004.
James M. Morris,
Acting Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
[FR Doc. 04-22816 Filed 10-6-04; 11:40 am]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
#### Freeman Paper Box Co., Inc., Respondent, v. Joseph B. Franklin, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Nolan, P. J., Cars-well, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.