alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 11.1

                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                                                                  Three             Six
                                                                                                  Months           Months
                                                       Years Ended December 31,                   Ended            Ended
                                                                                                 June 30,         June 30,

<S>                                             <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>              <C> 
                                                1994             1995             1996             1997             1997


Income per share calculations:

Income before extraordinary item                $ 281             $  1,765         $  2,331       $  (1,691)       $  (1,491)

Extraordinary item                                -                 -                  (64)           -                ( 229)


Net income                                      $ 281             $  1,765         $  2,267       $  (1,691)       $  (1,720)

Weighted average number of
common and common equivalent
shares are as follows:

    Weighted average common
    shares outstanding                                               3,184           10,273           12,359           12,184

    Shares issued from
    assumed exercise of
    options and warrants (1)                    _____                  211              182              173              178


    Weighted average number
    of shares outstanding                        N/A                  ,395           10,455           12,532            2,362

Income per common and
common equivalent shares:


    Income before extraordinary
    item                                                          $   0.52        $    0.23        $  (0.13)        $  (0.12)

    Extraordinary item                          _____               -                (0.01)           -                (0.02)


    Net income                                   N/A              $   0.52         $   0.22        $  (0.13)        $  (0.14)

_______________________
<FN>

(1)      Shares issued from assumed exercise of options and warrants include
         the number of incremental shares which would result from applying
         the "treasury stock method" for options and warrants, APB 15,
         paragraph 38 and Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 83
</FN>
</TABLE>
462815.1
#### William CRAWFORD v. CITY OF PASCAGOULA.

No. 46077.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 25, 1971.

Ransom P. Jones, III, Pascagoula, for appellant.

Bryan, Gordon, Nelson & Allen, Peyton S. Irby, Jr., Pascagoula, for appellee.

RODGERS, Justice:

The issue here involved is whether or not the appellant should have been given a *556city permit to operate a place of business to sell alcoholic beverages. The City Council of Pascagoula, Mississippi, refused to issue the permit upon the ground that the business was within five hundred feet of a church. The appellant denied that the place of business was within the distance regulated by the city ordinance because it is said that the building called a church is not a church, but is a storage house for the use of a church.

The issue as to whether or not a building is used as a church is an issue of fact for the determination of the administrative agency in the first instance, and, unless it is clearly shown that its determination was arbitrary or capricious, the courts will not interfere with its determination. Moreover, in the instant case, the record shows that the petitioner did not comply with the requirements of Section 10238-01 Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated (Supp. 1968).

The judgment of the trial court is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

ETHRIDGE, C. J., and BRADY, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         148,585
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  420,936
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (56,591)
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         6,802,152
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,273,740)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 5,800,642
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        5,283,168
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     298,526
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   5,800,642
<SALES>                                        81,458
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,384,061
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  68,961
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               823,798
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             609,128
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (117,826)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (117,826)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                66,535
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (51,291)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (6.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (6.33)
<FN>
                    NOTE:  TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS AND TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES
                           ARE NOT APPLICABLE BECAUSE REGISTRANT DOES NOT
                           PRESENT A CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET.
</FN>
        


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DAY
INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10Q
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           6,516
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,573
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     16,148
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                48,822
<PP&E>                                          45,160
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 236,048
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,981
<BONDS>                                        146,624
<COMMON>                                             1
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,548
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   236,048
<SALES>                                         79,628
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                79,628
<CGS>                                           49,406
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   65,953
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (21)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,161
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,535
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,081
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,454
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,454
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 11 - COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                             Three months ended                       Nine months ended
                                                                 September 30,                           September 30,
                                                          ---------------------------        -------------------------------
                                                               1997           1996                1997               1996
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
<S>                                                       <C>            <C>                 <C>                <C>
Weighted average common shares outstanding                  12,806,047     12,885,000          12,847,587         12,879,708

Net effect of dilutive stock equivalents based
  on the treasury stock method using ending
  market price in 1997 and average market
  price in 1996                                                950,832        772,660             880,548            885,314
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
Total weighted shares outstanding                           13,756,879     13,657,660          13,728,135         13,765,022
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
Net income                                                $  1,818,021   $  1,346,320        $  4,371,188       $  6,104,768
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
Net income per share                                      $       0.13   $       0.10        $       0.32            $  0.44
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
                                                          ------------   ------------        ------------       ------------
</TABLE>



                                       20
AIR-15-3344-E 

September 29, 2015 

 Exemption No. 8429E 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2004-18023 

Mr. Kim Durnwirth 

Director 

Regulatory & Quality System Oversight 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

P.O. Box 3707, MC 67-XC 

Seattle, WA 98124-2207 

Dear Mr. Durnwirth: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend and amend 

Exemption No. 8429, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its 

effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated July 15, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of The Boeing Company (Boeing) for an extension and amendment of Exemption 

No. 8429, as amended. That exemption from § 45.29 (b)(1) of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR), allows Boeing to affix temporary registration marks that are less than 

12 inches tall on certain aircraft during production acceptance flights. The amendment you 

request would add the Boeing South Carolina facility (airport ID CHS, Charleston AFBInternational Airport) to the list of those locations where the use of “window numbers” is 

allowed under the exemption.

In your petition, you indicate there has been no change in the conditions, public interest, and 

equivalent level of safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 
 2

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent. 

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8429, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. 

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 44701, which the 

FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant The Boeing Company (Boeing) an exemption 

from § 45.29 (b)(1) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to allow Boeing to 

affix temporary registration marks that are less than 12 inches tall on certain aircraft during 

production acceptance flights, subject to the following Conditions and Limitations. 

Conditions and Limitations 

 

1. Boeing may exercise the privileges of this exemption only for production acceptance 

flights in new production aircraft manufactured by Boeing and operated under a 

special flight permit. 

2. Boeing may exercise the privileges of this exemption at only the following locations: 

(1) Boeing Field; (2) Renton Municipal Airport; (3) Paine Field Everett and (4) CHS, 

Charleston AFB-International Airport. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8429, as amended, to 

October 31, 2017 unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

//s// 

Dorenda D. Baker 

Director, Aircraft Certification Service
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 
**- 1829** 

ROXIE ANN DAVIS ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

CHERYL MORRIS; PAM MAY; CONNIE JELLIFFE ,
Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. ( 3:15

- cv
- 00080

- RJC

- DSC )

Submitted : November 17, 2015 Decided: November 19, 2015

Before SHEDD , DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Roxie Ann Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Roxie Ann Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s or der
dismissing her tort complaint on the basis of Younger

abstention. See Younger v. Harris , 401 U.S. 37 (1971). W e have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis

v. Mor ris , No. 3:15

- cv
- 00080

- RJC

- DSC (W.D.N.C. Mar. 3, 2015).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Richard Darnell Amos

, * From the 3 2nd District Court

of Nolan County,

Trial Court No. 1236 7

.

Vs. No. 11

- 1 9

- 00 0 5 5

- CR * February 4 , 20 2 1

The State of Texas

, * Memorand um Opinion by Williams , J.

(P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Trotter , J. , and W illiams, J.

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
A, M

NOS. 

### RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

### MAY 08 2015 Brandon Scott Coppock AbelAcosta, Clerk § In the Texas Court of § Criminal Appeals § at Austin, Texas vs. The State ofTexas


### On Appeal from the Fifth' Court ofAppeals FILED IN in Cause Nos. 05-13-00907-CR and 05-13-00908GQBRT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL? 

### HAY 112015 Appellant's Motion to Extend the Time for Filing a Petition for Discretionary Review Abel Acosta, Clerk

To the Honorable Judges ofsaid Court:



### • Comes now Appellant, and respectfully requests that the time for filing a Petition for Discretionary Review in the above-styled and numbered cause be extended. In support ofthis motion Appellant would show: 

### I". OnApril 20, 2015, Appellant's conviction was affirmed by theFifth Court 

### ofAppeals inCauseNos. 05-13-00907-CRand 05-13-00908-CR styledBrandonScott Coppock v. The State ofTexas. 

### 2. The present deadline for filing aPetition for Discretionary Review is May 20, 2015. Appellant respectfully requests an extension of time until July 20, 2015.3. No previous extension oftime has been granted. 

### 4. Appellantwould showthe Courtthat a reasonableexplanationexistsforthe 

### requested extension. Appellant is currently incarcerated in theTexas Department of 

### Criminal Justice andhaslimited legal knowledge. Appellant must goto theunit law library to research and draft the issues. 

### Wherefore, premises considered, Appellant respectfully requests thatthetime 

### for filing a Petition forDiscretionary Review be extended to July 20, 2015. Respectfully submitted,

Brandon Scott Coppock, Appellant # 12010703 North Tower 3 W 07 P.O. Box 660334 Dallas, TX 75266-0334 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy ofthe foregoing motion has been served on the Dallas County District Attorney's Office, Appellate Division, 133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB 19, Dallas, Texas, 75207, by depositing same in the United States Mail, Postage Prepaid on Mfey* <^ 2015.
Coppock, Appellant
No. 00-1064.

#### Ellis *v.*City of Carrollton et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Rita Dore SUIRE v. COMBINED INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA.

No. 53941.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 12, 1973.

In re: Rita Dore Suire, widow of Anthony Suire, Sr., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Acadia,

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
# C_2021391EN.01000702.xml

| 27.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 391/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 391/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du travail de Mons (Belgium) lodged on 21 June 2021 — Ville de Mons, Zone de secours Hainaut — Centre v RM

(Case C-377/21)

(2021/C 391/11)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour du travail de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants, defendants in the original proceedings: Ville de Mons, Zone de secours Hainaut — Centre

Respondent, applicant in the original proceedings: RM

Question referred

Is Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement implemented by Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (1) to be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which, for the calculation of the salary of professional firefighters employed on a full-time basis, accredits, in respect of the length of service for financial purposes, the services provided on a part-time basis as a volunteer firefighter according to the volume of work, that is to say the duration of the services actually provided, in line with the principle of ‘pro rata temporis’, and not according to the period over which the services were provided?

---

(1)  OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9.

---
#### Bruce E. BARNETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-39.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Jan. 9, 1970.

Robert W. Rawlins, Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Morton J. Hanlon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

HOBSON, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.

MANN, J., dissents with opinion.

MANN, Judge

(dissenting).

Barnett has been sentenced to a total of twenty-six years for three felonies and attacks the first sentence, imposed in 1955. He was in custody when this petition was filed. He was sentenced in 1956 to a one-year term for escape and to a fifteen-year term for robbery. His petition attacking the first sentence as constitutionally invalid for failure of the state to provide counsel was dismissed because the sentence attacked had been fully served.

Whether Barnett’s later sentences began to run in 1956 or upon the expiration of the allegedly invalid sentence is not by any means a moot question, but rather one of considerable immediate significance to him, and it ought to be considered. I would reverse on authority of Sibron v. New York, 1968, 392 U.S. 40, 88 S.Ct. 1889, 1912, 20 L.Ed.2d 917, and Carafas v. LaVallee, 1968, 391 U.S. 234, 88 S.Ct. 1556, 20 L.F.d. 2d 554. See annotation, 9 A.L.R.3d 462.

To the extent that prior decisions of Florida courts purport to deny meaningful relief on grounds of excessively technical definitions of mootness inconsonant with present constitutional standards they ought to be overruled.
#### James DeSOTO v. GORDON’S TRANSPORTS, INC. et al.

No. 7143.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Nov. 13, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 1967.

Writ Refused Feb. 2, 1968.

Jimmie R. Major, Baton Rouge, for Gordon’s Transports, Inc.

Gordon M. White, Baton Rouge, Charles A. Riddle, Jr., Marksville, for James De-Soto.

Joseph A. Gladney, Baton Rouge, for Allen J. Hernandez.

Breard Snellings, of Sessions, Fishman, Rosenson & Snellings, New Orleans, for Younger Bros., Inc., James DeSoto and Continental Casualty Co.

Louis G. Baine, Jr., of Seale, Smith, Baine & Phelps, Baton Rouge, for Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc.

Roger M. Fritchie, of Durrett, Hardin, Hunter, Dameron & Fritchie, Baton Rouge, for Gordon’s Transports, Inc., and Insurance Co. of North America.

Before LANDRY, REID, and BAILES, JJ.

*147LANDRY, Judge.

For the reason this day handed down in Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Younger, 204 So.2d 781, the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed at appellant’s cost.

Affirmed.
#### Alda AZCUY, Appellant, v. Walter F. NOVAK, Trustee, and Jean Novak, his wife, Appellees.

No. 71-833.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 29, 1972.

Rehearing Denied March 15, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES
                SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                     WASHINGTON, D.C.  20549

                            FORM 10-Q

     QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
       SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
                        DECEMBER 31, 1996

                   File Commission No. 0-27304

                     Charter Financial, Inc.
      (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                             Illinois
  (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

                            37-1345386
               (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)


          114 West Broadway
          Sparta, Illinois                               62286
(Address of principal executive office)                (Zip Code)


       Registrant's telephone number, including area code:
                          (618) 443-2166


                          Not Applicable
       (Former name, former address and former fiscal year,
                  if changed since last report)


     Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to
file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.     Yes / X /    No /   /

     Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the
issuer's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable
date: There were 4,253,459 shares of the Bank's common stock
outstanding as of February 6, 1997.

<PAGE>