alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 13

- 00044

- CV

ROBIN L. KING APPELLANT

V.

FIA CARD SERVICES, N .A. APPELLEE

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TARRANT COU NTY

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMEN T

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

On March 4, 2013

, and April 10, 2013, we notified appellant in accordance

with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless

the $175 filing fee was paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). Appellant has not paid

the $175 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 Because appellant failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of

appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court ’s order of August 28, 2007, 2

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 4 3.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEI E R , J.; LIVINGSTON, C

. J. ; and GABRIEL, J.

DELIVERED: May 16 , 2013

2 See Supreme Court of Tex.

, Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation , Misc. Docket No. 07

- 9138 (Aug. 28, 2007) (listing fees in courts of appeals).
#### Lorenzo A. Wilson and W. M. Mason, Jr., Copartners Doing Business as Wilson-Mason Company, *Appel*lants, v. Rosa C. Duncan, as Executrix of the Will of L. A. Duncan, Deceased, *Appellee.*

Opinion Filed January 19, 1923.

Where a cause lias been decided on appeal and tbe mandate bas been transmitted to tbe lower court, a motion made in tbe Supreme Court for a modification of tbe supersedeas and bond in tbe cause will be denied.

A Motion to Modify Supersedeas.

Motion denied.

*48
      *Marks, Marks & Holt*and *Herbert Lamson,*for Appellants;

*Thomas W. Fielding*and *W. S. Broome,*for Appellee.

Whitfield, J.

A motion by appellants is made for “an appropriate order providing for the modification of the order of supersedeas made and entered herein under date of November 12, '1920, and for a like modification of the supersedeas bond filed herein on November 18, 1920, so that the condition of the said supersedeas bond shall not require of these appellants to well and truly abide by and perform any final decree rendered herein and pay to the complainant such sum or sums of money as shall be awarded thereby. ”

The supersedeas order and bond referred to were predicated upon an appeal taken to- an order overruling a'demurrer to a bill of complaint involving a large sum of money alleged to be in the custody of the copartners who demurred to the bill. The order overruling the demurrer to the bill of complaint was affirmed (Duncan v. Wilson, 82 Fla. 232, 89 South. Rep. 496), and the cause was remanded to the Circuit Court. Subsequently other proceedings were had in the cause and an appeal is now pending in this court from other interlocutory orders made in the cause. This motion is made upon the theory that the conditions of the litigation have changed by the payment of money into the court and by the fixing and giving of a supersedeas bond for only $1,000.00 on the present appeal. The decree of this court affirming on appeal the order overruling the demurrer to the bill of complaint is the law of the case and the mandate as to that has been transmitted to the lower court. The supersedeas order and bond referred to are matters now in the Circuit Court; and if the movants *49are entitled to any remedy in the premises it is to be had in the Circuit Court.

The motion is denied.

Taylor, C. J., and Ellis, Browne and West, J. J., concur.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- Sizewise Rentals, LLC Under Contract No. N00183-15-F-1237 APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 62000
Benjamin R. Prell, Esq.

Geiger Prell Overland Park, KS Craig D. Jensen, Esq.

Navy ChiefTrial Attorney Julia P. Hatch, Esq.

Trial Attorney Fort Detrick, MD ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed withprejudice. Dated: July 1, 2019

ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 62000, Appeal ofSizewise Rentals, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
Exhibit 99.18





CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON








Golden Star Resources Ltd.


United States Securities and Exchange Commission





Re: Golden Star Resources Ltd.





Ladies and Gentlemen:





I hereby consent to (i) being named and identified as a “qualified person” in connection with the following documents, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the “Form 40-F”) of Golden Star Resources Ltd. (the “Company”) to which this consent relates: (A) the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2016, (B) the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2016, (C) the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report on a Feasibility Study of the Prestea Underground Gold Project in Ghana" effective date November 3, 2015 and filed on January 22, 2016, (ii) the inclusion or incorporation by reference of information derived from such documents in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-211926, 333-175542, 333-169047, 333-118958, 333-105821 and 333-105820), as amended, and Registration Statement No. 333-196906 on Form F-10, as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, or to any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporated by reference in the above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.














/s/ Ken Reipas________________________


Ken Reipas





March 30, 2017
#### Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. H. T. Swatts as Administrator of the Estate of G. C. Swatts, *Defendant in Error.*

Opinion Filed May 20, 1913.

On Rehearing.

Per Curiam.—In

In a petition for rehearing it is suggested that the court failed to give due weight to the uncontradicted testimony of the conductor of the train that prior to the accident, the conductor instructed the deceased flagman to go to the rear of the caboose, some sixty feet distant therefrom, and flag a street crossing to prevent persons from being injured by the movement of the train, the contention being that the deceased was negligent and *404should not recover under the statute since he violated the order given him and was at the end of the caboose when he was killed, when he should have been sixty feet away in a place of safety.

Counsel overlook the fact that there is also uncontradicted evidence that the deceased was at the time of the injury actually working on the bumper on the end of the caboose trying to adjust it with his hands, with a flag in his hand, which was apparently in the line of his duty as flagman, and that the injury was caused by the undue violence with which the caboose was suddenly moved backward when no notice thereof was given to anyone who might have been at the end of the caboose. The evidence as to the presence of the flagman at the end of the caboose does not indicate negligence on his part. The jury settled the questions of the probative force of the evidence, and as there is testimony to sustain the finding, and nothing to indicate that the jury were not governed by the evidence, the verdict will not be set aside as being contrary to the evidence.

Rehearing denied.

Shackleford, C. J., and Taylor, Cockrell/ Hocker, er and Whitfield, J. J., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3473 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3473

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that only licensed 
  medical doctors and licensed doctors of osteopathy may perform eye 
surgery at Department of Veterans Affairs facilities or under contract 
                with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 6, 2003

  Mr. Sullivan (for himself, Mr. Bilirakis, Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of 
    Florida, Mr. Burgess, Mr. Gingrey, Mr. Janklow, Mr. Keller, Mr. 
Sessions, Mr. Stearns, Mr. Weldon of Florida, Ms. Berkley, Ms. Corrine 
Brown of Florida, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Green of Texas, Mr. Scott of Georgia, 
 Mr. Snyder, and Mr. Strickland) introduced the following bill; which 
           was referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that only licensed 
  medical doctors and licensed doctors of osteopathy may perform eye 
surgery at Department of Veterans Affairs facilities or under contract 
                with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

    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 ``Veterans Eye Treatment Safety (VETS) 
Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION AS TO PERSONS WHO MAY PERFORM EYE SURGERY FOR 
              DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

    Section 1707 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(c)(1) Eye surgery at a Department facility or under contract 
with the Department may be performed only by an individual who is 
either a licensed medical doctor or a licensed doctor of osteopathy.
    ``(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term `eye surgery' means 
any procedure involving the eye or the adnexa in which human tissue is 
cut, burned, frozen, vaporized, ablated, probed, or otherwise altered 
or penetrated by incision, injection, laser, ultrasound, ionizing 
radiation, or by other means, in order to treat eye disease, alter or 
correct refractive error, or alter or enhance cosmetic appearance. Such 
term does not include removal of superficial ocular foreign bodies or 
the prescription and fitting of contact lenses for the purpose of 
altering refractive error.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2590-2596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1002]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Revised Non-Foreign Overseas Per Diem Rates

AGENCY: DoD, Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee.

ACTION: Notice of Revised Non-Foreign Overseas Per Diem Rates.

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

SUMMARY: The Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee is 
publishing Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin Number 212. This 
bulletin lists revisions in the per diem rates prescribed for U.S. 
Government employees for official travel in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto 
Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and Possessions of the United 
States. AEA changes announced in Bulletin Number 194 remain in effect. 
Bulletin Number 212 is being published in the Federal Register to 
assure that travelers are paid per diem at the most current rates.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  January 1, 2000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  This document gives notice of revisions in 
per diem rates prescribed by the Per Diem Travel and Transportation 
Allowance Committee for non-foreign areas outside the continental 
United States. It supersedes Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin 
Number 211. Distribution of Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletins by 
mail was discontinued. Per Diem Bulletins published periodically in the 
Federal Register now constitute the only notification of revisions in 
per diem rates to agencies and establishments outside the Department of 
Defense. For more information or questions about per diem rates, please 
contact your local travel office. The text of the Bulletin follows:

    Dated: January 11, 2000.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-10-M

[[Page 2591]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JA00.000


[[Page 2592]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JA00.001


[[Page 2593]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JA00.002


[[Page 2594]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JA00.003


[[Page 2595]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JA00.004


[[Page 2596]]


[FR Doc. 00-1002 Filed 1-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-C
§ 746.113 Coordination with State supervisory authority. ( a ) *Coordination when request for review by the Director of the Office of Examination and Insurance filed.* In the event that a material supervisory determination subject to a request for review by the Director of the Office of Examination and Insurance is the joint product of NCUA and a State supervisory authority, the Director of the Office of Examination and Insurance will promptly notify the appropriate State supervisory authority of the request for review, provide the State supervisory authority with a copy of the request for review and any other related materials, solicit the State supervisory authority's views regarding the merits of the request for review before making a determination, and notify the State supervisory authority of the Director's determination.
( b ) *Coordination when appeal to Supervisory Review Committee filed.* In the event that a material supervisory determination appealed to the Committee is the joint product of NCUA and a State supervisory authority, the Committee will promptly notify the State supervisory authority of the appeal, provide the State supervisory authority with a copy of the appeal and any other related materials, solicit the State supervisory authority's views regarding the merits of the appeal before making a determination, and notify the State supervisory authority of the Committee's determination. Once the Committee has issued its determination, any other issues that may remain between the insured credit union and the State supervisory authority will be left to those parties to resolve.
( c ) *Coordination when appeal to board filed.* In the event that a material supervisory determination appealed to the Board is the joint product of NCUA and a State supervisory authority, the Board will promptly notify the State supervisory authority of the appeal, provide the State supervisory authority with a copy of the appeal and any other related materials, solicit the State supervisory authority's views regarding the merits of the appeal before making a determination, and notify the State supervisory authority of the Board's determination. Once the Board has issued its determination, any other issues that may remain between the insured credit union and the State supervisory authority will be left to those parties to resolve.
#### THOMAS S. BIGELOW *v.*LYDIA S. BIGELOW.

A forced marriage — dissatisfaction—the natural fruits of it.

Where a man uses undue means to coerce a child of fourteen to marry him, against her declarations that she has no love for him, and the advice of friends, he will not be divorced for her absence amongst her friends, without clear and decided efforts to win her affections and induce her to live with him.

Divorce. Cause wilful absence. It appeared in proof, that in ■ 1827, the complainant, then about years old, was married to the defendant, then about fourteen years old. She was unwilling to marry him, and said she could never love him; but by his procurement, she was *coerced*into the marriage. . They lived together a few months, when she left him, went to her friends in Massachusetts, and refuses to live with him longer. He treated her well while they were together, and once made an effort to induce her to return; she told him she had no affection for him, and never could live with him. He was cautioned before the marriage that he never would be happy in a marriage so procured, but persisted.

Lyman, for the petitioner.

By the Court.

This man seems to have used undue and improper means to compel a child to marry him against *her*own will, and the advice of his friends, and now, while reaping the natural reward of his efforts, he has become dissatisfied, and desires a divorce. Without some more and decided attempts to gain the affections of his wife and at reconciliation, we consider it our duty to deny him a divorce. Let the bill be dismissed.
§ 120.1 Applicability. This part applies to the following persons: ( a ) All air carriers and operators certificated under part 119 of this chapter authorized to conduct operations under part 121 or part 135 of this chapter, all air traffic control facilities not operated by the FAA or by or under contract to the U.S. military; and all operators as defined in 14 CFR 91.147.
( b ) All individuals who perform, either directly or by contract, a safety-sensitive function listed in subpart E or subpart F of this part.
( c ) All part 145 certificate holders who perform safety-sensitive functions and elect to implement a drug and alcohol testing program under this part.
( d ) All contractors who elect to implement a drug and alcohol testing program under this part.
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲

▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

06/07

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 07 Jun 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.44 N 77.04 W Meters AGL
#### W. E. Jordon, Plaintiff in Error, v. W. S. Solomon, Defendant in Error.

AVrit of error to a judgment of tire Circuit Court for Hillsborough County.

H. C. Gordon and V. H. Knight, for Plaintiff in Error.

F M. Simonton, for Defendant in Error.

Writ of error dismissed on motion of counsel for plaintiff in error on January 28th, 1913.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



        <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET, THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS, AND THE STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          71,433
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  113,961
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    125,751
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               313,974
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,898,195
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          501,116
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        794
<COMMON>                                        42,774
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,353,511
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,898,195
<SALES>                                        687,122
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               687,122
<CGS>                                          180,171
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  537,745
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            149,377
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   149,377
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.004
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.004


</TABLE>
§ 611.1217 Plain language requirements. ( a ) *Plain language presentation.* All communications to equity holders required under §§ 611.1210, 611.1223, 611.1240, and 611.1280 must be clear, concise, and understandable. You must: ( 1 ) Use short, explanatory sentences, bullet lists or charts where helpful, and descriptive headings and subheadings;
( 2 ) Minimize the use of glossaries or defined terms;
( 3 ) Write in the active voice when possible; and
( 4 ) Avoid legal and highly technical business terminology.
( b ) *Balanced statements.* Communications to equity holders that describe or enumerate anticipated benefits of the proposed termination should also describe or enumerate the potential disadvantages to the same degree of detail.
§ 105.45 Use of tandem parachute systems. ( a ) No person may conduct a parachute operation using a tandem parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a tandem parachute system, unless— ( 1 ) One of the parachutists using the tandem parachute system is the parachutist in command, and meets the following requirements: ( i ) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist—
( ii ) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute, and
( iii ) Holds a master parachute license issued by an organization recognized by the FAA, and
( iv ) Has successfully completed a tandem instructor course given by the manufacturer of the tandem parachute system used in the parachute operation or a course acceptable to the Administrator.
( v ) Has been certified by the appropriate parachute manufacturer or tandem course provider as being properly trained on the use of the specific tandem parachute system to be used.
( 2 ) The person acting as parachutist in command: ( i ) Has briefed the passenger parachutist before boarding the aircraft. The briefing must include the procedures to be used in case of an emergency with the aircraft or after exiting the aircraft, while preparing to exit and exiting the aircraft, freefall, operating the parachute after freefall, landing approach, and landing.
( ii ) Uses the harness position prescribed by the manufacturer of the tandem parachute equipment.
( b ) No person may make a parachute jump with a tandem parachute system unless— ( 1 ) The main parachute has been packed by a certificated parachute rigger, the parachutist in command making the next jump with that parachute, or a person under the direct supervision of a certificated parachute rigger.
( 2 ) The reserve parachute has been packed by a certificated parachute rigger in accordance with § 105.43(b) of this part.
( 3 ) The tandem parachute system contains an operational automatic activation device for the reserve parachute, approved by the manufacturer of that tandem parachute system. The device must— ( i ) Have been maintained in accordance with manufacturer instructions, and
( ii ) Be armed during each tandem parachute operation.
( 4 ) The passenger parachutist is provided with a manual main parachute activation device and instructed on the use of that device, if required by the owner/operator.
( 5 ) The main parachute is equipped with a single-point release system.
( 6 ) The reserve parachute meets Technical Standard Order C23 specifications.