alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NUMBER 13-11-00383-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

KATHLEEN WILD, Appellant,

v.

FRANK J. SCHUSTER, INDIVIDUALLY 

AND AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF

FRANK SCHUSTER, ET AL., Appellees. 

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the Probate Court at Law No. 3

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Kathleen Wild, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 

Probate Court at Law No. 3 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number P-12,779-C. 

Appellant has filed a notice to withdraw appeal on grounds that she no longer wishes to 

pursue the appeal. 
2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant=s motion to 

withdraw the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.1(a). Appellant=s motion to withdraw the appeal is granted, and the appeal is 

hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) 

("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant=s request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

22nd day of November, 2011.
Order filed, June 14, 2016

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 00296

- CR

____________ ARMANDO CASTILLO , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1448751



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due May 31, 2016

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the rep orter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Edna Thornton , the substitute court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 2015 - 1537 Directorate ID : 2015 - SW - 014 - AD Helicopter Model: The Enstrom Helicopter Corporation Model F - 28A, 280, F - 28C, F - 28C - 2, F - 28C - 2R, 280C, F - 28F, F - 28F - R, 280F, 280FX, and 480 H elicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 323 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to detect a crack in a spindle and prevent loss of a main rotor blade and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Cos ts : Parts per Helicopter $ 8,164 to replace a spindle Labor per Helicopter ( 15 work- hour x $ 8 5 /workhour for the inspection) (0.5 work- hour x $85/work- hour for reporting) $ 1,275 $43 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 1,318 for the inspection and reporting $ 8,164 to replace a spindle Total US Fleet Cost $ 25,714 for the inspection and reporting Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Gregory J. Michalik
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.94 MB)
 
 Train camp buehring Warfighter Journalism defend Squad Middle East 204th PAD Protect 204th Public Affairs Detachment Story 1st Armored Division U.S. Army Central Command third army arcent Patton’s Own Public affairs specialist broadcast specialist SOvM Squad Overmatch PEO STRI Simulition VBS3 3rd abct u.s. army central Public Affairs Operation U.S. Army Soldier Army training News Centcom exercise USARCENT Kuwait deployment army reserve
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed February 24, 2016

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D15-1280

Lower Tribunal No. 14-1451

________________



### Nadyne Mata

, Appellant,

vs.



### Angel R. Mata

, Appellee.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade

County, George A. Sarduy

, Judge.

AV Professional Association, and Alba Varela

, for appellant.

Angel R. Mata, in proper person.

Before FERNANDEZ, LOGUE, and SCALES, JJ.

LOGUE, J.A general magistrate issued a report recommending that Angel R. Mata

(“former husband”) pay $5,500 per month in temporary alimony to Nadyne Mata

(“former wife”) and $733.14 per month in child support. On reviewing exceptions

to the general magistrate’s report filed by the former husband, the trial court

rejected the general magistrate’s recommendation.

“Once a trial court appoints a magistrate to take testimony and make

findings, it loses the prerogative of substituting its judgment for that of the

magistrate.” Cerase v. Dewhurst

, 935 So. 2d 575, 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). “In

such instances, a trial court reviewing a magistrate’s findings and

recommendations takes on a role similar to that of an appellate court reviewing a

trial court’s actions.” Rodriguez v. Reyes

, 112 So. 3d 671, 673 (Fla. 3d DCA

2013). If exceptions to the magistrate’s report have been filed, “a trial court

reviews the record to determine whether the magistrate’s factual findings and

conclusions are supported by competent substantial evidence, and whether the

magistrate’s legal conclusions are clearly erroneous or whether the magistrate

misconceived the legal effect of the evidence.” Id. (quotation and citation omitted).

In this case, competent, substantial evidence supported the magistrate’s

findings, including the income it imputed to the former husband based on the

former wife’s unrebutted testimony regarding his historical earnings. See Ghay v.

Ghay

, 954 So. 2d 1186, 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (“[T]he Florida Supreme Court

2and other district courts have suggested that a presumption arises from a spouse’s

historical earnings that supports a finding the spouse can continue to earn the same

amount, absent evidence to the contrary.”) (citing Garfield v. Garfield

, 58 So. 2d

166, 167 (Fla. 1952); Seitz v. Seitz

, 471 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)). We

therefore reverse the trial court’s decision and remand for further proceedings

consistent with this opinion. Rodriguez

, 112 So. 3d at 674.

Reversed and remanded.

3
From: sdcclouser@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:31:16 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Scott Clouser

Harrisburg, PA 17112
***Exhibit 99.1***

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT  TO SECTION 905OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Each of the undersigned herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

This 14th day ofNovember, 2002.

 

 
| /s/ Douglas  K. Freeman    |   |
|----------------------------|--------|
| Chief  Executive Officer   |
|                       |
|                       |
| /s/ Steven  F. Herbert     |   |
| Chief  Financial Executive |

 

----
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
 
                              IDENTIX INCORPORATED
 
                 STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  FISCAL YEAR ENDED
                                                                       JUNE 30,
                                                      -------------------------------------------
                                                         1997            1996            1995
                                                      -----------     -----------     -----------
<S>                                                   <C>             <C>             <C>
Net income (loss)...................................  $ 1,250,000     $(3,441,000)    $  (715,000)
Number of shares used in computing per share
  amounts:
  Weighted average common shares outstanding........   24,366,000      23,485,000      19,371,000
  Common equivalent shares attributable to stock
     options and warrants...........................      770,000               *               *
                                                      -----------     -----------     -----------
  Total weighted average common and common
     equivalent shares outstanding..................   25,136,000      23,485,000      19,371,000
                                                      ===========     ===========     ===========
Net income (loss) per share.........................  $      0.05     $     (0.15)    $     (0.04)
                                                      ===========     ===========     ===========
</TABLE>
 
---------------
 
* Common equivalent shares had an anti-dilutive effect.
From: Ed & Vicki Kilroy

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Contraceptive Access

Date: Friday, August 12, 2011 4:51:22 PM

Dear HHS:

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in

asking you to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine

as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the new health care

law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These

preventive services are a critical element of the new law and would

provide countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny

women access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an

ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are pushing the

government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are

pushing for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health

providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt

from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny

access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by

accepting IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious

refusal exemption provisions.

This is a health issue, not a religious issue.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0001036070
<NAME> VIRGINIAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          20,898
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              40
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     72,837
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          60,780
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            59,050
<LOANS>                                        322,077
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,751
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 490,406
<DEPOSITS>                                     410,327
<SHORT-TERM>                                    30,885
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,772
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,905
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,517
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 490,406
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 13,108
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,888
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    65
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                17,061
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               7,108
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,864
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            9,197
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      406
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  16
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  6,946
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,224
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,052
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.77
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.35
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,147
<LOANS-PAST>                                       153
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,470
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      183
<RECOVERIES>                                        58
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,751
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,303
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            448


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





Form 8-K





Current Report





Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report  (Date of earliest event reported): October 25, 2016





Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation


(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)





001-11241


(Commission File Number)





Delaware37-1105865(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)(IRS Employer Identification Number)





2120 West End Avenue


Nashville, Tennessee 37203-0001


(Address of principal executive offices, with zip code)





(615) 341-1000


(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)








Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:








 ̈Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) ̈Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) ̈Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) ̈Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))







---













Item 2.02.  Results of Operations and Financial Condition.





On October 25, 2016, Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation issued a press release reporting financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2016.  A copy of the press release is attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated into this Item 2.02 by reference.





The information in this Current Report on Form 8-K, including Exhibit 99.1, is being furnished in accordance with the provisions of General Instruction B.2 of Form 8-K.








Item 9.01.  Financial Statements and Exhibits.








d)Exhibits:99.1Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation press release dated October 25, 2016














SIGNATURES





Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.





Caterpillar Financial Services CorporationDate:  October 25, 2016By:/s/ Leslie S. ZmuggLeslie S. ZmuggSecretary








2


---










EXHIBIT INDEX








Exhibit No.Description99.1Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation press release dated October 25, 2016








3
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12171]

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (the “Act”) (22 U.S.C. 2318(a)(1)) and Presidential Delegation of Authority dated June 27, 2023, I hereby determine that:
    - an unforeseen emergency exists which requires immediate military assistance to Ukraine; and
    - the emergency requirement cannot be met under the authority of the Arms Export Control Act or any other provision of law.

                    I, therefore, pursuant to authority delegated to me by the President, direct the drawdown of up to $500 million in                           ( print page 62620)                        defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, under the authority of section 506(a)(1) of the Act, to provide assistance to Ukraine. The Department of State will coordinate implementation of this drawdown.                

                    This determination shall be reported to the Congress and published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated: June 27, 2023.

Antony Blinken,

Secretary of State.

# Note:

 This document was received for publication by the Office of the Federal Register on September 6, 2023.

[FR Doc. 2023-19588 Filed 9-11-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
#### George P. Ide and others, Appellants, v. John Galt Smith and others, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.