alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         5521215
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          377333
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     266813
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        17945971
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          18068155
<LOANS>                                       33878880
<ALLOWANCE>                                      43787
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                59816730
<DEPOSITS>                                    43892375
<SHORT-TERM>                                   2000000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            1100060
<LONG-TERM>                                    1000000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          8863
<OTHER-SE>                                    11815432
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                59816730
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                2391319
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               894610
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                620360
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3906289
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1912171
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2065530
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          1840759
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     2195
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               36859
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                1371655
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 701808
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      701808
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    455599
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .68
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.22
<LOANS-NON>                                      20000
<LOANS-PAST>                                     66000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  11000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 41592
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                43787
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             43787
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 328 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 328

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 25, 1994.
    Resolved, That the House has learned with profound sorrow of the death of 
the Honorable Thomas P. ``Tip'' O'Neill, Jr., former Member of the House for 17 
terms and Speaker of the House of Representatives for the Ninety-fifth, Ninety-
sixth, Ninety-seventh, Ninety-eighth and Ninety-ninth Congresses.
    Resolved, That in the death of the Honorable Thomas P. ``Tip'' O'Neill, Jr. 
the United States and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have lost a valued and 
eminent public servant and citizen.
    Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to the Senate and 
transmit a copy thereof to the family of the deceased.
    Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark 
of respect to the memory of the deceased.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
No. 72-6446.

#### Winston et al. *v.*Scott, Attorney General of Illinois, et al.

Affirmed on appeal from D. C. N. D. Ill.
#### Jimmy Leon REEVES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-190.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 19, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
#### David POPPLEWELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-283.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 8, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
#### WILLIAM E. BURTON vs. ROUSE F. YOUNG.

Warranty of soundness in horses.

Latent and patent defects.

Measure or damages in an action for breach of warranty.

This was an action on the case for breach of warranty of soundness in the exchange of horses.

*The Court*

charged, that to entitle the plaintiff to recover, he must prove to the satisfaction j»f the jury—1. The contract of warranty ; that is, the consideration and the promise. 2. The breach of the contract of warranty. 3. The damage the plaintiff has sustained.

1. The plaintiff must prove an express warranty, viz: that he stated expressly that the horse was sound; or represented him as a sound animal. Whatever representations are made by the seller at the time of sale, as to the quality of the article, is an express warranty. But it must appear to the jury that the warranty was given to the plaintiff by the defendant, or by some person acting under the authority of 'the defendant, either before or at the time of the sale. If the warranty is made after the sale or completion of the contract, it is void for want of consideration, and the plaintiff in such case cannot recover.

2. If plaintiff has proved the contract, he must next show the breach of it. He must prove that the unsoundness, existed at the time of the sale. Any disease, infirmity or defect, which renders the horse less fit for present use and convenience, and not openly *234and palpably visible, and which is discoverable only by persons of skill and judgment in regard to the qualities of horses, constitutes unsoundness. Therefore, if a horse is deprived of sight in one eye, or the eye is defective; and this is only discoverable by persons skilled in horses, it constitutes unsoundness, and is a breach of the warranty.

*Cullen,*for plaintiff.

*McFee*and *Houston,*for defendant.

3. The measure of damages is the difference between the actual or real value of the horse in his defective, unsound state, and his value in that sound state he was represented to be by the defendant.

The damage to the defendant, arising from the'unsoundness of the horse exchanged for, cannot be deducted from or set off against the plaintiff’s claim in this action.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 April 2, 2019

p0325

Order 

Clerk

April 2, 2019

158280

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 158280

COA: 343412

Wayne CC: 13-006713-FC

CARON ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 5, 2018 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to 

meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                   1,000
       
<S>
                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                     OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                                 2,876
<SECURITIES>                                           8,136
<RECEIVABLES>                                         11,541
<ALLOWANCES>                                             515
<INVENTORY>                                           16,654
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      41,252
<PP&E>                                               124,025
<DEPRECIATION>                                        87,445
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       151,081
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 30,301
<BONDS>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                 858
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                            87,665
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         151,081
<SALES>                                               94,560
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      94,560
<CGS>                                                 59,690
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         15,987
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      18,849
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       160
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        1,062
<INCOME-TAX>                                             516
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      546
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                             546
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                              0.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0.34
        

</TABLE>
H. Res. 189

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

June 14, 1993.

Whereas the Voice of America is the global radio network of

the United States Government, seeking to promote understanding abroad for the United States, its people, culture, and policies;

Whereas the Voice of America’s charter calls upon it to provide consistently reliable and authoritative news, balanced

and comprehensive information about the United States,

and official pronouncements of the United States Government;

Whereas the Voice of America broadcasts are not directed to

audiences in the United States, so that most Americans

have no first-hand knowledge of the professionalism and

patriotism that are the hallmark of such broadcasts;

Whereas the Voice of America tells America’s story to the

world on a daily basis, not only in terms of news and politics and policy, but also by reflecting the complexity, diversity, and excellence of American art and culture;

Whereas chief among our Nation’s indigenous art forms is

jazz;

Whereas since 1955, Willis Conover of Voice of America has

been broadcasting the best of American jazz to millions

around the world;
2

HRES 189 EH

Whereas during that time, the music of Duke Ellington,

Charlie Parker, Ella Fitzgerald, Benny Goodman, Dizzy

Gillespie, and other great American artists, broadcast by

Mr. Conover, have come to symbolize the freedom and

creativity of democracy for those denied freedom; and

Whereas Mr. Conover has said ‘‘Jazz is a liberating kind of

music . . . every emotion—love, anger, joy, sadness—

can be communicated with the vitality and spirit that

characterizes our country at its best—which is of course

the same freedom that people everywhere should enjoy.’’:

Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives applauds

the Voice of America for disseminating the very best of

American culture to those in other lands, exemplified in the

work of Willis Conover who for thirty-eight years has made

a unique and important contribution to the cause of international understanding and good will.

Attest:

Clerk.
|   | (a) | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|                    |   |                                                                                                                          |
|-------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated:      May 7, 2009 |   | /s/      Stoney M. Stubbs, Jr.                                                                                                |
|                    |   | Stoney      M. Stubbs, Jr.Chairman      of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal      Executive Officer) |
|                    |   |                                                                                                                          |
| Dated:      May 7, 2009 |   | /s/      Ronald J. Knutson                                                                                                    |
|                    |   | Ronald      J. KnutsonSenior      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal      Financial and AccountingOfficer)  |
#### Eddie HARRIS, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1-507.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Nov. 14, 1967.

Eddie Harris, Jr., in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and R. Grable Stoutamire, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal C 194/30 J

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 194 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4730 July 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 194

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4730 July 2004

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 194/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2004/C 194/2 | Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 15 June 2004 to 15 July 2004 (Published pursuant to Article 12 or Article 34 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93 | 2 |
| 2004/C 194/3 | Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 15 May 2004 to 15 June 2004 (Published pursuant to Article 12 or Article 34 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93) | 5 |
| 2004/C 194/4 | Ex post notification of Eurostat grants in 2003 — Public information | 6 |
| 2004/C 194/5 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case No COMP/M.3513 — CATERPILLAR/XPART) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 7 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2004/C 194/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2004/C 194/2

Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 15 June 2004 to 15 July 2004 (Published pursuant to Article 12 or Article 34 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93

2

2004/C 194/3

Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 15 May 2004 to 15 June 2004 (Published pursuant to Article 12 or Article 34 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93)

5

2004/C 194/4

Ex post notification of Eurostat grants in 2003 — Public information

Ex post

6

2004/C 194/5

Prior notification of a concentration (Case No COMP/M.3513 — CATERPILLAR/XPART) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

7

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### John Thomas MORROW, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. R-72.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 1, 1973.

Robert P. Miller, Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Enoch J. Whitney, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal L 271/2013

| | ISSN 1977-0677
  doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2013.271.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 271 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5611 October 2013 |

ISSN 1977-0677

doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2013.271.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 271

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5611 October 2013

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EU) No 936/2013 of 12 September 2013 establishing for 2013 the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (1) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Regulation (EU) No 936/2013 of 12 September 2013 establishing for 2013 the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (1)

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02 - 14 - 00058 - CR

ROBERT AARON FORD APPELLANT
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

---------- FROM THE 355TH DISTR ICT COURT OF HOOD CO UNTY TRIAL COURT NO. CR12 570

---------- 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- Appellant Robert Aaron Ford pled guilty to continuous sexual abuse of a child, and the trial court sentenced him to fifty years’ confinement. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. In the brief, counsel avers that, in

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 h er professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California 2 by presenting a professional

ev aluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. 3 Appellant declined to file a pro se response to the Anders brief , and the State likewise declined to file a brief. After an appellant’s court

- appointed counsel files a mot ion to withdraw on the ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders , this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record to see if there is any arguable ground that may be raised on h is behalf. 4 Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 5 Because Appellant entered an open plea of guilty, our independent review for potential error is limited to potential jurisdictional defects, the voluntariness of his plea, error that is not independent of a nd supports the judgment of guilt, and error occurring after entry of the guilty plea. 6

2 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).

3 See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 510

– 11 & n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

4 See id. at 511.

5 See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 82

– 83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 35 1 (1988).

6 See Monreal v. State , 99 S.W.3d 615, 619

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) ; Young v. State , 8 S.W.3d 656, 666

– 67 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).3 We have carefully reviewed counsel’s brief and the appellate record. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in t he appellate record that arguably might support this appeal. 7 Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

PER CURIAM PANEL: DAUPHINOT , J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GARDNER, J. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 4 7.2(b)
DELIVERED: February 26, 2015

7 See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
#### McLAIN & BARNES HARDWARE CO. and McLain & Barnes Constr. Co. and United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Bennett E. WILSON.

No. 46046.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 8, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 29, 1971.

*579Dorrance Aultman, Simrall, Aultman & Pope, Hattiesburg, for appellants.

Dale & Upton, Columbia, for appellee.

RODGERS, Justice:

This is a workmen’s compensation case in which benefits were denied by the attorney referee and also denied by the full Workmen’s Compensation Commission on the ground that “claimant, Bennett E. Wilson, did not suffer an injury within the course and scope of his employment with the defendant, McLain and Barnes Hardware Company.” The Circuit Court of Jefferson Davis County, Mississippi, reversed the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission and allowed compensation to the claimant.

The issue here is clearly a question of fact as to whether or not the claimant borrowed a mud pump from his employer to be used by him to clean out a well for a church and was injured in an automobile accident while going to perform a personal favor to the church, or whether or not he was being sent by his employer to perform a duty for his employer.

It is possible that the members of this Court might have decided this case differently, but the Workmen’s Compensation Commission is the judge of the facts, and, unless the facts are so adverse to the finding of the Commission, and reach such proportion as to require this Court to intervene, we will affirm the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission if there is substantial evidence on which to base the finding of the Commission.

We think that there was substantial evidence to sustain the holding of the Commission that the claimant was on a personal mission at the time of his injury.

The judgment of the circuit court will be reversed and the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission reinstated denying the claim of the appellee.

Reversed and rendered.

GILLESPIE, P. J., and BRADY, PATTERSON and SMITH, JJ., concur.