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

San Antonio, Texas

September 8, 2016

No. 04-15-00644-CV

Bret RADCLIFFE, Robert Radcliffe, and Mamba Minerals, LLC,

Appellants

v.

TIDAL PETROLEUM, INC.,

Appellee

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-07-00176-CVL

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On August 24, 2016, this court withdrew its May 11, 2016 opinion and judgment and 

substituted a new opinion and judgment. A motion for rehearing or en banc reconsideration is

due on September 8, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1, 49.5, 49.7. A motion for extension of time 

to file a motion for rehearing is due on September 23, 2016. See id. R. 49.8. 

On August 31, 2016, Appellee moved this court for a twenty-one-day extension of time

to file a motion for rehearing. Appellee’s motion is GRANTED. See id. Appellee’s motion for 

rehearing is due on September 29, 2016.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

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

court on this 8th day of September, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
1

The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the

District of South Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3051

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of South Dakota.

Southy Thepmontry, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 6, 2006

Filed: September 14, 2006

___________

Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After a jury found Southy Thepmontry guilty of conspiring to distribute and

possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846,

the district court1

 sentenced him to 200 months in prison and 3 years of supervised

release. On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Thepmontry has filed a pro se supplemental

brief. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court

and grant counsel’s withdrawal motion.
-2-

Counsel argues that the district court erred by determining the drug quantity for

which Thepmontry was responsible at sentencing because a key witness was not

credible. We conclude that the district court did not clearly err. See Anderson v. City

of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985) (district court’s finding based on

credibility determination is virtually never clear error so long as it is not internally

inconsistent or based on testimony that is incoherent, implausible, or contradicted by

objective evidence); United States v. Milton, 153 F.3d 891, 898 (8th Cir. 1998)

(standard of review).

Turning to Thepmontry’s pro se arguments, we previously have rejected the

contention that Guidelines enhancements must be charged in the indictment and

proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Okai, 454 F.3d

848, 850-52 (8th Cir. 2006). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its

discretion by not appointing an interpreter at Thepmontry’s competency examination.

See Luna v. Black, 772 F.2d 448, 451 (8th Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (discussing when

interpreter is required); United States v. Coronel-Quintana, 752 F.2d 1284, 1291 (8th

Cir. 1985) (standard of review). As to Thepmontry’s claim of ineffective assistance

of counsel, it must be raised (if at all) in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See United

States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 827 (8th Cir. 2006) (this court “will

consider ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal only where the record has been

fully developed, where not to act would amount to a plain miscarriage of justice, or

where counsel’s error is readily apparent”).

Finally, after reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw.

______________________________
EPA Reg. No. 83558-26

(formerly 72167-44)
No. 10767.

#### The State, ex rel. Stephenson, Prosecuting Attorney, *v.*Edgington et al.

Decided April 28, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Adams county.

*Mr. Will P. Stephenson; Mr. George W. Pettit*and *Mr. James W. Tarbell,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. C. F. McCoy*and *Mr. A. R.*Johnson, for defendants in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                 TRANSATLANTIC HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                    YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                                               ----------------------------------
<S>                                                                            <C>         <C>         <C>
                                                                                  1996        1995        1994
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------

<CAPTION>
                                                                                   (in thousands, except per
                                                                                       common share data)
<S>                                                                            <C>         <C>         <C>
Weighted average common shares outstanding used in the computation of per
  common share earnings:
  Common shares issued.......................................................      23,783      23,739      23,702
  Common shares in treasury..................................................         800         800         800
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
Weighted average common shares outstanding*..................................      22,983      22,939      22,902
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
Net income (applicable to common stock)......................................  $  154,860  $  131,858  $  101,627
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
Earnings per common share:*
  Net income.................................................................  $     6.74  $     5.75  $     4.44
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
                                                                               ----------  ----------  ----------
</TABLE>

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

* The effect of all other common stock equivalents is not significant;
  therefore, this information is not presented.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                   JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                              110,237
<SECURITIES>                     37,435,812
<RECEIVABLES>                       235,002
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 38,038,009
<PP&E>                            1,230,183
<DEPRECIATION>                      814,253
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   38,491,928
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             6,515,674
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                             53,097
<OTHER-SE>                       31,923,157
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     38,491,928
<SALES>                             119,327
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    990,329
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       366,954
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    279,091
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   29,389
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     314,886
<INCOME-TAX>                          1,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 313,186
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                        313,186
<EPS-BASIC>                           .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                           .07



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


<ARTICLE>	5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FEDERATED PURCHASER, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>	1


       
<S>				<C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>             	3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>         	Oct-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>            	Nov-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>             	Jan-31-1997
<CASH>                        	     97,507
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                	    439,491
<ALLOWANCES>                  	     27,839
<INVENTORY>                  	    255,275
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             	    823,137
<PP&E>                       	    147,287
<DEPRECIATION>                	    118,115
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               	  1,127,905
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>        	    365,454
<BONDS>                                   0
<COMMON>                            171,976
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<OTHER-SE>                   	    539,799
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>	  1,127,905
<SALES>                      	    801,697
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              	    801,697
<CGS>                        	    610,160
<TOTAL-COSTS>                	    610,160
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    228,095
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   (36,558)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      599
<INCOME-PRETAX>               	   (37,157)
<INCOME-TAX>                           975
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (38,132)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                  	   (38,132)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                         (.02)
FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 

INFORMATION SHEET BY COURT REPORTERS 

You are expected to file the reporter’s record by the original due date. See Tex. R. App. P.35. If 

a reporter determines that the due date may not be met, please advise the Clerk of the Court of 

Appeals immediately in writing, stating the reason and the due date by which the record will be 

filed. Generally speaking, for good cause shown, the Court will grant no more than two 

extensions from the original record due date, each extension not to exceed 30 days in regular 

appeals and 10 days in accelerated appeals for a total period not to exceed 60 days in regular 

appeals and 20 days in accelerated appeals.

 

Appellate Case Number: Trial Court Case Number: 

(1) Is there a Reporter's Record? Y N

(2) Are you the only court reporter involved in this appeal? Y N

If not, please provide the names and addresses of all other court

reporters below.

(3) Has the appellant requested that the reporter’s record be prepared or 

has the trial court ordered that the record be prepared?

 Y N

(4) Please select from the following options:

 A. The appellant has paid for the record.

 B. The appellant has made arrangements to pay for the record

 C. The appellant is appealing as indigent.

 D. The appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the

 record and is not appealing as indigent.

(5) Extension (fill out if extension is required for any reason other than payment)

I was unable to file the record in this appeal by ________. I expect the record 

in this appeal to be approximately _______ pages. The record covers 

_______days of testimony. I believe that I can file the record by _________. I 

ask that the court grant an extension until that time for filing the record.

Additional Comments: ___________________________________________

Court Reporter's Signature, Full Address, Email Address and Telephone Number: 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 8/20/2015 2:10:19 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
**Exhibit 10.1(bt)**

** **

**AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE**

**TO**

**FACTORY PENSION PLAN OFSAUER-DANFOSS (LASALLE) AND INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACEAND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, AND IT’S LOCAL UNION NO. 285**

**(As Amended and RestatedEffective January 1, 1999)**

 

 

**WHEREAS**, Sauer-Danfoss (US) Company (previouslyknown as Sauer-Sundstrand Company) (the “Company”) sponsors the Factory PensionPlan of Sauer-Danfoss (LaSalle) and International Union, United Automobile,Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, and Its Local UnionNo. 285 (the “Plan”); and

 

**WHEREAS**, the Plan was submitted on February 20,2002 to the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for purposes of securing afavorable determination letter with respect to the Plan; and

 

**WHEREAS,** the IRS has requested an amendment tothe Plan in connection with the issuance of a favorable determination letterwith respect to the Plan’s qualified status under Section 401(a) of theInternal Revenue Code; and

 

**WHEREAS**, the Company and the UAW Local Union No.285 (the “Union”) have agreed that such determination to amend the Plan at theIRS request is in the best interest of the Company and its employees.

 

**NOW, THEREFORE**, pursuant to Section 19.2 of the Plan,the Company hereby amends the Plan, effective January 1, 2000, by inserting thefollowing new paragraph (c) to Section 1.2 of the Plan as a part thereof:

 

“Notwithstanding the last paragraph of paragraph (a)immediately above and the last paragraph of paragraph (b) immediately above,for the period beginning January 1, 2000 and ending April 3, 2003, a lump sumdistribution under the Plan shall equal the lump sum distribution, asdetermined under the actuarial assumptions provided for in paragraphs (a) and(b) immediately above or as determined under the terms of the Plan prior toJanuary 1, 2000, whichever results in the greater present value benefit to theParticipant.

 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the Company has authorized theexecution on its behalf of this Amendment Number Three this 3rd day of April,2003.

 
| Sauer-Danfoss  (U.S.) Company |   | UAW, Local Union No. 285 |
|-------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|
| /s/ MATTHEW K. BENDLER        |   | /s/ WILLIAM C. FALASSI   |
|                          |   |                     |
| /s/ SUZANNE SOBKOWIAK         |   | /s/ PATRICIO ESCATEL     |
|                          |   |                     |
|                          |   |                     |

 

----
No. 10424.

#### Tuttle, Trustee, *v.*Trowbridge et al.

Decided May 5, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Trumbull county.

*Mr. George M. Tuttle,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Washington Hyde; Mr. George Bunting*and *Mr. T. H. Gillmer,*for defendants in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, C. J., Summers and Davis, JJ. concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 28, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000034408
<NAME> FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-28-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      68,768,007
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                593,257,392
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           715,635,247
<PP&E>                                     465,779,503
<DEPRECIATION>                             161,643,300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,022,767,205
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      400,420,668
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    18,262,510
<OTHER-SE>                                 582,354,911
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,022,767,205
<SALES>                                    628,015,954
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           628,015,954
<CGS>                                      412,299,231
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              580,547,023
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             47,468,931
<INCOME-TAX>                                17,860,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         29,608,931
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                29,608,931
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
# **Exhibit 32.1**

#  

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

I, Howard R. Levine, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officerof Family Dollar Stores, Inc. (the “Company”), do hereby certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

•**                 **theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended November 27,2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

**•****                 **the information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 

Date:  January 5, 2005

 

 
| /s/    | Howard R. Levine                                  |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Howard R. Levine                                  |
|   | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |
|   | (Principal Executive Officer)                     |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to Family Dollar Stores, Inc. and will be retained by FamilyDollar Stores, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

 

----
^
                          	 Diamond Hill
                                 ------------
                                 Investments


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
					Investor Contact:
					James F. Laird-Chief Financial Officer
					614-255-3353 (jlaird@diamond-hill.com)

DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.
REPORTS CORRECTED TAX INFORMATION ON 2010 SPECIAL DIVIDEND

	Columbus, Ohio - March 29, 2011 - Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc.
(NASDAQ:DHIL) has revised the tax characterization of its 2010 special dividend
as follows:

	Original			Corrected
      Form 1099-DIV	      	      Form 1099-DIV

      Box 1a = $4.90	     	      Box 1a = $5.16
      Box 1b = $4.90	              Box 1b = $5.16
      Box 3  = $8.10	              Box 3  = $7.84
      Total per share = $13.00	      Total per share = $13.00

Shareholders will receive a corrected form 1099-DIV from brokers or custodians.


About Diamond Hill:
Diamond Hill provides investment management services to institutions and
financial intermediaries seeking to preserve and build capital. The firm
currently manages mutual funds, separate accounts and private investment
funds.  For more information on Diamond Hill, visit www.diamond-hill.com.

					###

            325 John H. McConnell Blvd, Suite 200, Columbus, Ohio 43215
                         614-255-3333  info@diamond-hill.com
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 8993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4831]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--United Technologies Corporation & Pratt, 
Whitney, Government Engines & Space Propulsion Division

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 15, 1997, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), United Technologies, 
Pratt & Whitney, Government Engines & Space Propulsion Division 
(``P&W''), an unincorporated operating unit of United Technologies 
Corporation (``UTC''), has filed written notification on behalf of UTC 
and its participating business units, simultaneously with the Attorney 
General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities 
of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The 
notification was filed for the purpose of limiting recovery of 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties 
are UTC, Hartford, CT (acting through United Technologies Research 
Center, East Hartford, CT and Pratt & Whitney GESP, West Palm Beach, 
FL); SKF USA, Inc., Jamestown, NY (acting through its MRC Bearings 
Division); Saint-Gobain/Norton Industrial Ceramics Corporation, 
Worcester, MA (acting through its Norton Advanced Ceramics Division); 
and the University of Florida, Gainsville, FL (acting through its 
office of Engineering Research). The parties entered into a 
Collaboration Agreement effective November 27, 1996 to engage in 
cooperative research and development in the area of affordable large 
silicon nitride rolling elements, including, without limitation, the 
experimental building, finishing, assembly and testing of models, 
prototypes and equipment, and the development of materials and 
processes.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 97-4831 Filed 2-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
```