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

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 14

- 00134

- CV

WOODGLEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

, Appellant

v.

Rachel V. ODOM

, Appellee

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013

- CI

- 15443

Honorable Laura Salinas, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is reversed and the matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consist ent with this court’s opinion. Specifically, we remand for rendition of judgment that includes an order of sale.

We order that appellant Woodglen Homeowners Association recover its costs of appeal, if any, from appellee Rachel V. Odom.

SIGNED November 26, 2014.

_____________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(i)

STEPHEN E. ROTH
DIRECT LINE: (202) 383-0158
Internet: sroth@sablaw.com



                                  July 5, 2001

VIA EDGAR
---------

Board of Directors
GE Capital Life Assurance
 Company of New York
125 Park Avenue, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10017-5529

          Re:   GE Capital Life Separate Account II
                -----------------------------------

Ladies and Gentlemen:

          We hereby consent to the reference to our name under the caption
"Legal Matters" in the Statement of Additional Information filed as part of
Post-Effective Amendment No. 2 to the Registration Statement on Form N-4 filed
by GE Capital Life Separate Account II for certain flexible premium variable
deferred annuity contracts (File No. 333-47016).  In giving this consent, we do
not admit that we are in the category of persons whose consent is required under
Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933.

                              Very truly yours,

                              SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP



                              By: /s/ Stephen E. Roth
                                  -------------------
                                  Stephen E. Roth
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,845,172
<SECURITIES>                                   297,159
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,609,059
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,827,064
<DEPRECIATION>                                 853,736
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,414,044
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,746,467
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,414,044
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,391,348
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,090,121
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                301,227
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            301,227
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   259,092
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.36
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the quarterly report of Decorator Industries, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended April 4, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, William A. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael K. Solomon, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







|      |              |  |     |                                            
|----- | ------------ |  | --- | -------------------------------------------
|Date: | May 18, 2009 |  | By: | /s/ William A. Johnson                     
|      |              |  |     | William A. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer
|      |              |  |     |                                            
|      |              |  |     |                                            
|Date: | May 18, 2009 |  | By: | /s/ Michael K. Solomon                     
|      |              |  |     | Michael K. Solomon, Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                         772,000
<SECURITIES>                                14,314,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      78,742,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (15,549,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              83,267,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     59,877,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    19,314,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,428,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                83,267,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,138,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,030,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,150,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                958,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            955,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   955,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### 3170 CORPORATION et al., Appellants, v. Ramon DIAZ, Appellee.

No. 72-1423.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 26, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 11

DEL GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES CORP. & SUBSIDIARIES

COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
THREE MONTHS AND NINE MONTHS ENDED MAY 3, 1997

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                        Three Months Ended         Nine Months Ended
                                            May 3, 1997               May 3, 1997
                                      -----------------------  ------------------------
                                                     Fully                     Fully
                                       Primary      Diluted      Primary      Diluted
                                      ----------   ----------   ----------  -----------
<S>                                   <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>       
Net income                            $1,283,682   $1,283,682   $3,391,984   $3,391,984
                                      ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========
Reconciliation of weighted
average number of shares
outstanding to amount used
in earnings per share computation:

Weighted average number of
      shares outstanding               7,402,866    7,402,866    7,431,786    7,431,786

Add - shares issuable from assumed
      exercise of options under the
      Treasury Stock method            1,064,834      998,118    1,073,062    1,075,973
                                      ----------   ----------   ----------   ----------
Weighted average number of shares
      outstanding as adjusted          8,467,700    8,400,984    8,504,848    8,507,759
                                      ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========
Net income per common share           $     0.15   $     0.15   $     0.40   $     0.40
                                      ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========
</TABLE>





The Company  utilized the Treasury  Stock  method for  computing  net income per
common share.
#### Andrew Hendry HASTY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-402.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 29, 1972..

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 10.4

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE



$4,000.00                                                      Las Vegas, Nevada
                                                               04/06/01


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Hunapu, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Maker"), promises
to pay to the order of Putun, LLC (hereinafter referred to as "Holder"), PO Box
50464, Henderson, NV, 89016, or at such other address as Holder may designate in
writing, the principal sum of Four Thousand Dollars ($4,000) until paid, at the
rate of six percent (6%) per annum.

The principal amount of the note shall be due and payable on or before 04/05/02.

Should the amount owing on this note not be paid when due, the entire unpaid
principal sum evidenced by this Note will, without notice to the Maker, become
due and payable.

Maker hereby waives presentment of payment, protect and demand, notice of
protest, demand and dishonor and nonpayment of this Note, and consents that the
holder may extend the time of payment or otherwise modify the terms of payment
or any part or whole of the indebtedness evidenced by this Note as the request
of any other person liable hereon, and consent shall not alter nor diminish the
liability of any party hereunder.

Maker may repay the indebtedness evidenced hereby in whole or in part from time
to time without premium or penalty.

As used herein, Holder shall include any subsequent holder of this Note. Maker
shall have no right to assign this Note without the consent of Holder, and in no
event shall any assignment of this Note by Maker act to release Maker from any
obligations hereunder unless such release is evidenced in writing by Holder.

This Note shall be governed by the laws of the State of Nevada.

Witness the hand of the undersigned this 6 day of April 2001.


                                               Hunapu, Inc.

                                               /s/ John C. Francis, President
                                               ------------------------------
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2010, (the Report) of First
West Virginia Bancorp, Inc., the (Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                                                                                   
|--------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 12, 2010 |  | /s/ Sylvan J. Dlesk                                                               
|                      |  | Sylvan J. Dlesk                                                                   
|                      |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer/Director                          
|                      |  | (Principal Executive Officer)                                                     
|                      | 
|Date: August 12, 2010 |  | /s/ Francie P. Reppy                                                              
|                      |  | Francie P. Reppy                                                                  
|                      |  | Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
|                      |  | (Chief Financial Officer)
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T A N G E L M U N O Z M O R A L E S and ALEJAN DRA M UN OZ, P et i t i o n ers, v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 71211 A ge nc yN os . A 075- 509- 942

A 075- 509- 943 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d A pr i l20, 2011 ** B efo re: R Y M E R , T H O M A S , an dP A E Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A nge lM unoz M or a l e s and A l e j andr aM unoz , na t i ve s and c i t i z e ns of M exi co, pet i t i on for r evi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order d e n y in g th e irm o tio n to r e o p e n . W e h av e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n , Moh am m ed v.



# FI LED MA Y05 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 71211 2 G on zales , 400 F . 3d 785, 791–92 ( 9th C i r . 2005) , and w e de nythe pe t i t i on f or r e v i e w. T h e B IA d i dn o tab u se i t s d i scret i o n i n d en yi n g as u n t i m el y p et i t i o n ers’ m ot i on t o reopen b ec ause the m ot i on w as fi l ed m ore than 9 0 d ay s a ft erthe fi nal a d m in is tr a tiv e o r d e r . See 8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .2 ( c ) ( 2 ) ; se e al so Cruz v . Mukasey , 532 F . 3d94 6, 94 9 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( per c uri am ) ( “ T he pend encyof a pet i t i on for r evi ew of an order of re m ov aldo es no tt ol lthe st atut ory t i m e l i m i tfor the fi l i ng of a m o tio n to r e o p e n w ith th e B I A .” ) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
#### Joe Dolph WILLIAMS et al. v. TOWN OF MANY, Sabine Parish Police Jury and Hon. George R. Cook, Sheriff of Sabine Parish.

No. 60848.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 11, 1977.

In re: Joe Dolph Williams, et al applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Sabine. 350 So.2d 224.

Writ refused.
#### Jessie B. BOYETT v. ALLIED STEEL BUILDERS and Zurich Insurance Company.

No. 50341.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 24, 1978.

Dixon L. Pyles, Jackson, for appellant.

Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell & Dukes, B. Stevens Hazard, Jackson, for appellees.

Before SMITH, P. J., and SUGG and BROOM, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
#### Sam BROWN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-1937.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 22, 1977.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Thomas G. Murray, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Margarita Esquiroz, Asst. Atty. Gen., John C. Mop-pert, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and HAVER-FIELD and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Falcon v. State,*226 So.2d 399 (Fla.1969); *Blackman v. State,*279 So.2d 99 (Fla.3d DCA 1973); *Thomas v. State,*326 So.2d 413 (Fla.1975); *Darden v. State,*329 So.2d 287 (Fla.1976); *James v. State,*334 So.2d 83 (Fla.3d DCA 1976).
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FOR 10-Q FOR
THE SIX  MONTHS  ENDED  JUNE  30,  1999  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCES
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            75,244
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           4
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 106,840
<CASH>                                           1,002
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                              13,562
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          50,635
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 295,523
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 59,826
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                 14
<POLICY-OTHER>                                  44,681
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                            4,441
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 44,571
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,169
<OTHER-SE>                                     113,601
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   295,523
<PREMIUMS>                                      17,682
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              3,454
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     702
<BENEFITS>                                       7,933
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      2,383
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             5,722
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,842
<INCOME-TAX>                                       773
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,069
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,069
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.78
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0




</TABLE>
#### State of Missouri, Defendant in Error, *vs.*J. F. Harney, Plaintiff in Error.

1. Judgment affirmed.

*Error to Warren Circuit Court.*

*P. P.*Stewart, for Plaintiff in Error.

*C. E.*Peers, for Defendant in Error.

Adams, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an indictment for grand larceny. The larceny charged was stealing a mule. The defendant was convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary for the term of three years.

The evidence tended to show, that the mule had been stolen in St Louis County, and taken by the defendant to Warren County; and from Warren to Lincoln County; that he was followed to Lincoln and brought back to Warren County without legal arrest, and then legally arrested in Warren County.

The only material point raised and discussed is, that the defendant could not be indicted and punished in Warren County. This question is settled by section 19 (2 W. S., 1089), which provides, that “when property stolen in one County, and brought to another, shall have been taken by larceny, burglary or robbery, the offender may be indicted, tried and convicted for such larceny, burglary or robbery in the County into which such stolen property was brought, in the same manner as if such' larceny, burglary or robbery had been committed in that County.”

Let the judgment be affirmed.

The other judges concur.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Federal Trade Commission

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580

Office of Commissioner

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

DISSENTING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER 

REBECCA KELLY SLAUGHTER

Regarding the FTC Staff Comment on the VA’s Interim Final Rule on the Authority of VA 

Professionals to Practice Health Care

Commission File No. V210000 

January 15, 2021 

I regretfully dissent from the Commission’s vote to authorize a staff comment to the Department 

of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) regarding its Interim Final Rule, Authority of VA Professionals to 

Practice Health Care. The Rule confirms that VA health care professionals licensed by one state 

and working within the scope of their VA employment may work in any state, under the VA’s 

national standard of practice, regardless of where they are licensed or scope of practice. I

generally concur with the statement of Commissioner Chopra, who agrees with the staff 

comment that license portability may provide substantial benefits but contends that we should 

not ignore the risks that overbroad preemption may pose. 

I write separately to state my view that we could have found common ground between the views 

espoused by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle; the party-line vote on this advocacy, 

decried by Commissioners Phillips and Wilson, was hardly the only outcome available to us. 

Especially considering that the VA’s Rule has already been published, I find it unfortunate that 

we did not take the time to find an available consensus.