alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 6, 2014

No. 04-14-00018-CV

Damien HERRERA and Blaine Castle,

Appellants

v.

Judy STAHL and Sue Hensley,

Appellees

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-CI-05750

Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court signed the order appellants seek to appeal on December 16, 2013. 

Because this is an accelerated, interlocutory appeal, appellant’s notice of appeal was due to be 

filed on January 6, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). A motion for extension of time to file the 

notice of appeal was due on January 21, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. Although appellants 

filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3, they did not file 

a motion for extension of time. 

A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good 

faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen-day 

grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. 

Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, 

the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a 

timely manner. See id.; TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C). 

It is therefore ORDERED that appellant file, within fifteen days from the date of this 

order, a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a 

timely manner. If appellant fails to respond within the time provided, the appeal will be 

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).
_________________________________

Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 6th day of February, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Editorial Note on Part 26
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 26 appear at 87 FR 71455, Nov. 22, 2022.

§ 26.57 Authorization update. ( a ) Before granting authorization to an individual whose authorization has been interrupted for more than 365 days but less than 3 years and whose last period of authorization was terminated favorably, the licensee or other entity shall ensure that— ( 1 ) A self-disclosure has been obtained and reviewed under the applicable requirements of § 26.61;
( 2 ) A suitable inquiry has been completed under the applicable requirements of § 26.63;
( 3 ) The individual has been subject to pre-access drug and alcohol testing under the applicable requirements of § 26.65; and
( 4 ) The individual is subject to random drug and alcohol testing under the applicable requirements of § 26.67.
( b ) If potentially disqualifying FFD information is disclosed or discovered, the licensee or other entity may not grant authorization to the individual, except under § 26.69.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-50835 Summary Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus GREG HALL, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. MO-95-CR-21-1
- - - - - - - - - - July 31, 1996 Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Greg Hall appeals his conviction of distribution of cocaine base. He contends solely that his guilty plea is invalid because the district court violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1). The district court's error in advising Hall that he faced four years of supervised release when he really faced five was harmless error inasmuch as the sentence of which he was warned was substantially greater than that which he received. See UnitedNo. 95-50835 -2- States v. Pierce , 5 F.3d 791, 793-94 (5th Cir. 1993). Likewise, the district court's failure to advise Hall of all the consequences of violating his term of supervised release cannot be considered a material factor which affected his decision to plead guilty. See United States v. Johnson , 1 F.3d 296, 302 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc). AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           47636
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                            3269
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 13939
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     356580
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        1121395
<ALLOWANCE>                                      10625
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1613416
<DEPOSITS>                                     1226123
<SHORT-TERM>                                     77241
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              18084
<LONG-TERM>                                     112537
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         13454
<OTHER-SE>                                      165977
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 1613416
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  98089
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                21345
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   965
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                120399
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               45418
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                8898
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            66083
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     2185
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 798
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  42759
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  33353
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       33353
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     23583
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.74
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.19
<LOANS-NON>                                       3917
<LOANS-PAST>                                      2477
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   140
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  47728
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  9679
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                     2827
<RECOVERIES>                                      1072
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                10625
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              8459
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                           2166
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from McCombs
Realty Partners 1999 First Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000759198
<NAME> MCCOMBS REALTY PARTNERS
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             332
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                           5,956
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,531)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,309
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                          5,654
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,469)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,309
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   356
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   368
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 120
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (12)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.70)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

 v. ) CR. NO. 1:06-cr-201-WHA-CSC

)

OSCAR MARTINEZ-RAMIREZ )

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the government's motion for release of prisoner (Doc. #33)

filed January 5, 2007, and for good cause, it is

ORDERED that the motion be and hereby is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that the United States Marshals Service release custody of

OSCAR MARTINEZ-RAMIREZ, to Special Agents Devin Whittle and/or Bob Greenwood,

Drug Enforcement Administration, on January 5, 2007, through May 30, 2007, so that said

agents can take such prisoner into custody for the purpose of transporting him to the Office

of the United States Attorney without the necessity of the presence of a Deputy United States

Marshal.

It is also ORDERED that Agents Devin Whittle and/or Bob Greenwood return said

prisoner into the custody of the United States Marshals Service when they have finished with

him.

Done this 5th day of January, 2007.

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cr-00201-WHA-CSC Document 34 Filed 01/05/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          19,257
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                33,780
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     23,531
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           3,269
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             3,269
<LOANS>                                        496,179
<ALLOWANCE>                                     10,763
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 594,031
<DEPOSITS>                                     505,636
<SHORT-TERM>                                     5,688
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              8,835
<LONG-TERM>                                     16,537
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,579
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,756
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 594,031
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 13,020
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  409
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   199
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                13,628
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               4,505
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,674
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,954
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      794
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,261
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,261
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,655
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.94
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    6.56
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,154
<LOANS-PAST>                                       593
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 12,134
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                10,253
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      607
<RECOVERIES>                                       323
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               10,763
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            10,763
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 11 Filed 10/02/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 11 Filed 10/02/2006 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

FARMERS TELECOMMUNICATIONS )

COOPERATIVE, INC., )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06CV790-VPM

 )

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of the Unopposed Motion to Extend Time for Verizon Business Network

Services, Inc., and Qwest Communications Corporation to File an Answer or Other Responsive

Pleadings (Doc. #5), filed on November 6, 2006, and for good cause, it is 

ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED. The defendants shall file their answer or other

responsive pleadings in response to the plaintiff's complaint on or before December 15, 2006.

Done this 8 day of November, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 7 Filed 11/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Berrie L. Gordon, Respondent, v. Sim R. Gluckson et al., Appellants, and Special Funds Conservation Committee, Respondent. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Sweeney, J.

Appeals by the employer and its carriers from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed March 25, 1969. It is conceded that claimant, while working as a domestic, injured her back in two compensable accidents, one on July 16, 1959 and another on August 31, 1961. In October of 1961, while claimant was hospitalized with a history of back pain for two years, X rays taken of the lumbosacral spine indicated a *“*probable infectious process or an osteoehrondritis.” In September of 1962 when her back condition became worse, she was again hospitalized, this time for back surgery. X rays of the chest at that time revealed pulmonary tuberculosis and the back operation was canceled. X rays of the lumbosacral spine showed tuberculosis spondylitis of the lumbosacral joint. In May of 1963 claimant was discharged from the hospital after an eight-month treatment of the tuberculosis. She continued under the care of her physician, suffering from back pain from time to time. The board has determined that claimant’s tubercular back condition was aggravated by both accidents and that claimant has a continuing causally related disability. Appellant carriers contend that there is no substantial evidence to support the board’s findings. Dr. Ehrlich, one of claimant’s attending physicians, testified that the accidents were competent to produce *1071the disability.'' Claimant gave a history *of*continuing back pain. Dr. Rosen, claimant’s orthopedic consultant, testified that claimant’s weakened batik condition resulted from both accidents, and that the tuberculosis of the lumbosacral joint was aggravated by the injuries sustained in the two accidents. Dr. Shera, the impartial specialist, conceded on cross-examination that tuberculosis can metastasize to an area which is more susceptible due to a pre-existing injury. While there was contrary testimony and evidence, questions of fact were created which were in the province of the board to decide. *(Matter of Amato*v. *Agway, Inc.,*33 A D 2d 850; *Matter of Bómbala*v. *Lark Mfg. Co.,*32 A D 2d 593, mot. for lv. to app. den. 25 N T 2d 737.) Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Greenblott, Cooke and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum by Sweeney, J.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

OWEN J. ROGAL, D.D.S., )

P.C. d/b/a THE PAIN CENTER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 3:06cv728-MHT

) 

SKILSTAF, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the motion for leave to reply

(Doc. No. 58) is granted.

DONE, this the 6th day of June, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 59 Filed 06/06/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          30,034
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,913
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                24,385
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    166,132
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          28,287
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            29,401
<LOANS>                                        412,537
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,597
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 682,195
<DEPOSITS>                                     545,061
<SHORT-TERM>                                    37,548
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,029
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,643
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      76,914
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 682,195
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 27,534
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                9,759
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                37,293
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              12,800
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,721
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           23,572
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,175
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 363
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 13,214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,553
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       9,812
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,812
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.63
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.14
<LOANS-NON>                                      4,417
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,556
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 5,336
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,136
<RECOVERIES>                                       222
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,597
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,447
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,150
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1


                                CERTIFICATION OF
          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
                         UNIVERSAL DETECTION TECHNOLOGY

I, Jacques Tizabi, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Universal
Detection Technology;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

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

      4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the registrant and I have:

      a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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 controls and
procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

      c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

      5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

      a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

      b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: August 17, 2006


/s/Jacques Tizabi
-------------------------------------------
By:    Jacques Tizabi
Title: Chief Executive Officer and Acting
       Chief Financial Officer
#### David S. Pultz et al., Appellants, v Catherine Economakis et al., Respondents.

Submitted September 4, 2007;

decided October 23, 2007

Reported below, 40 AD3d 24.

Motion by the City-wide Task Force on Housing Court et al. for leave to file an affirmation amici curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the affirmation is accepted as filed.