alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Norman F. ROSS et al., Appellants, v. Thomas WERNER et al., Appellees.

No. 72-174.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 27, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NO T FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED EU GENE TODD , App ellant ,
v. Cas e No

. 5D 22

- 1523 LT Cas e No. 2022

- 30646- COCI

CONQUESTOR TO D D AN D T REMALE MORGAN , Appellee s. _______________________________/ Decision filed September 20, 2022 Appeal from the County Court for Volusia County , Wesley Heidt , Judge. Eugene Todd, D aytona Beach, p ro se. No Appearance for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

AFF IRMED.

LA MBERT, C.J. , EISNAUGLE and HARRIS , JJ., concur.
#### STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, an Agency of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. George TURNER et al., Appellees.

No. P-25.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 7, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT
32.1

906
CERTIFICATION

The
undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The
 accompanying Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
 the period ended November 30, 2009, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all
 material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
 Company.                                                             

|      |                |  |                               | 
|----- | -------------- |  | ----------------------------- | 
|Date: | April 14, 2010 |  | /s/ David H.
 Roche           | 
|      |                |  | President
 and                | 
|      |                |  | Chief
 Executive Officer      | 
|      |                |  |                               | 
|      |                |  | /s/ Steven
 M. Caspers        | 
|      |                |  | Executive
 Vice President and | 
|      |                |  | Chief
 Financial Officer      | 

---
1

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Katrina Marie Weibel v. Nicholas Jay Streeby

Appellate case number: 01-18-00058-CV

Trial court case number: 16-1394-F425

Trial court: 425th District Court of Williamson County

Appellant, Katrina Marie Weibel, has filed a notice of appeal of the trial court’s 

order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. We previously abated the appeal 

and remanded the case to the trial court to consider issues about the completeness of the 

court reporter’s record as to the following reporter’s records, which appellant requested:

1. Case 16-1246-F425, Protective Order Hearing, 5/2/16;

2. Case 16-1102-F425, Name Change Final Hearing, 5/3/16; and

3. Case 16-2899-F425, Protective Order Dismissal Hearing, 5/4/16.

On April 9, 2019, appellant notified the Clerk of this Court that she “prefer[s] to turn in 

[her] Appellant’s brief and continue with the Appeal.” 

Accordingly, we withdraw the March 28, 2019 order of continuing abatement and 

January 23, 2019 order of abatement and reinstate the case on the Court’s active docket. 

Appellant’s brief is due to be filed no later than 30 days from the date of this 

order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a).

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __April 16, 2019___
### 6(&7,21±'HVL JQ6SHFLILFDWLRQV

'HVLJQ6SHFLILFDWLRQV

7<3(2).,/1   ,52125(3(//(7,=,1*

%851(5&$3$&,7<

38/9(5,=('&2$/ 00%78+5

12)8(/2,/  00%78+5

1$785$/*$6  00%78+5RSHUDWLQJ00%78+5PD[  )8(/6

12)8(/2,/  86*3+$736,*

  %78*$/

$720,=,1*$,5  6&)0$7LQ:&

1$785$/*$6  6&)02SHUDWLQJ

  2SHUDWLQJ ' 3DFURVVEXUQHU36,*

  %786&)/+9  675$,*+76:,5/$,5 6&)0DWLQFKHV:&

3,/27

 1$785$/*$6  6&)02SHUDWLQJ %78VFI/+9

     SVLJPD[DFURVVSLORW   3,/27$,5   6&)0'U\$LU2SHUDWLQJ

     SVLJPD[DFURVVSLORW

     6&)03XUJLQJ'U\$LU
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed 

July 14, 2022.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00501-CV

IN RE AB LAND COMPANY, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

268th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 16-DCV-229539

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On Tuesday, July 12, 2022, relator AB Land Company filed a petition for 

writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. 

R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable R. 

O'Neil Williams, presiding judge of the 268th District Court of Fort Bend County,

to set aside the trial court’s July 23, 2020 order denying relator’s summary 
2

judgment and finding that relator does not have standing to defend against the 

counter-claim of adverse possession.

Relator has not established that it is entitled to mandamus relief. 

Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Bourliot, Hassan, and Wilson.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 92 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 92

Encouraging people in the United States to recognize March 1, 2013, as 
                        Read Across America Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 28, 2013

Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois (for himself and Mrs. Davis of California) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                     on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Encouraging people in the United States to recognize March 1, 2013, as 
                        Read Across America Day.

Whereas reading is a basic requirement for quality education and professional 
        success, and is a source of pleasure throughout life;
Whereas the people of the United States must be able to read if the United 
        States is to remain competitive in the global economy;
Whereas Congress has placed great emphasis on reading intervention and providing 
        additional resources for reading assistance, including through the 
        programs authorized in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
        1965 and programs such as Early Reading First, Improving Literacy 
        through School Libraries, and Striving Readers; and
Whereas more than 50 national organizations concerned about reading and 
        education have joined with the National Education Association (NEA) to 
        use March 1 to celebrate reading and the birth of Theodor Geisel, also 
        known as Dr. Seuss: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) honors Theodor Geisel, also known as Dr. Seuss, for his 
        success in encouraging children to discover the joy of reading;
            (2) honors the 15th anniversary of Read Across America Day;
            (3) encourages parents to read with their children for at 
        least 30 minutes on Read Across America Day in honor of the 
        commitment of the House of Representatives to building a Nation 
        of readers; and
            (4) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        Read Across America Day with appropriate ceremonies and 
        activities.
                                 <all>
```
#### John A. Cross, Plaintiff in Error, *vs.*Stephen O. Hulett, Defendant in Error.

against another of two joint owners of personal property, nor will a defendant in such action be entitled to recover anything, save his costs.

*Error to Caldwell Court of Common Pleas.*

Dixon, *HosMnson 8f*McLaughlin, for Plaintiff in Error.

*Dunn and*Johnson, for Defendant in Error.

Sherwood, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit brought before a Justice of the Peace, by Cross against Hulett, to recover a cane mill, skimmer and pans, valued at $40.00 — resulting in a verdict and judgment for defendant. On appeal to the Common Pleas Court, the plaintiff had a verdict, which was set aside and a new trial granted, when the defendant again had a verdict and judgment in his behalf for the recovery of the *property*sued for, as well as for costs. This record (which has embodied within it a large portion of the petty quarrels, animosities and small trades of a neighborhood in Caldwell County, having no necessary connection with the matter in dispute,) shows that a Mrs. Beckett, the plaintiff and the defendant, were the joint owners of the above mentioned property, and that plaintiff *398claimed in liis evidence on the trial, that defendant had sold him his interest therein, which transfer was disputed by defendant. But whether defendant had sold his interest or not, in neither event was he entitled to a judgment against the ■plaintiff for the *property*in suit, as it is not pretended that the latter had ever parted with his joint share in the property. Replevin, or, its statutory substitute, an action for the possession of specific personal property, cannot be maintained by one joint owner of personal property against his co-owner, for the obvious reason that neither is entitled to the *immediate*and *exclusive possession*of such property. (2 Grlf. Ev., §§ 563 646 and 648; Wells vs. Noyes, 12 Pick., 324; 6 Bac. Ab., 697; *Id.,*71.)

For these reasons the judgment for tbe defendant, as rendered, was manifestly erroneous, regardless of wbat instructions may have been given or refused.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

Judges Wagner and Napton absent, the other Judges concur.
——

DESCRIPTION.

Dwelling-houses

Whether deaf and |
dumb, blind, insane,
idiotic, pauper, or
convict.

The Name of every Person whose usual place Profession, Occupation, or Trade | Puace oy Biaru.

of cach Male Person over 15 | Naming the State, Territory,

years of aye. or Country.

of abode on the first day of June, 1850, was

mulatta, |

White,
black, or

——

in this family.

order of visitation.
in the order of

visitation.

arried within the

numbered in the
year.
| Attended School

within the year.

Families numbered

Personas over 28 y'ra of agu
who vannot read & wri
Dwelling-houses

Color,

ee

| M

10 11,12 13

—— _ ——-— a. -

J lies
LO tz Cov LY, Le A—*%
| Oke F
: te, fp
LEA tt ¢

15 be

eh A a,
ae |

Historic census records are maintained and released by the National Archives and Records Administration, not the U.S. Census Bureau.

Visit http://www.archives.gov for more information about publicly available records like the one shown here.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 11.2

                                   IRIDIUM LLC
                 (A Development Stage Limited Liability Company)

                    COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER CLASS 1 INTEREST
                   (in thousands except Member Interest data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
                                                         --------------------------------------------
                                                                 1998                    1999
                                                         --------------------    --------------------
<S>                                                      <C>                     <C>
NET LOSS APPLICABLE TO CLASS 1 INTERESTS:

Net loss                                                   $         203,566       $         505,401

Preferred dividend requirement                                         1,447                   1,668
                                                         --------------------    --------------------

Net loss applicable to class 1 interests                   $         205,013       $         507,069
                                                         ====================    ====================

AVERAGE NUMBER OF CLASS 1 INTERESTS:

Average number of Class 1 Interests outstanding                  141,227,834             146,781,298

     Assumed exercise of options and warrants                     18,219,622              17,209,062

     Assumed conversion of Series A Class 2 Interest                 738,679                 851,751
                                                         --------------------    --------------------

Average number of Class 1 Interests assumed to be
     outstanding, assuming dilution                              160,186,135             164,842,111
                                                         ====================    ====================

NET LOSS PER CLASS 1 INTEREST:

Basic (1)                                                  $            1.45       $            3.45

Diluted (2)                                                $            1.28       $            3.08
</TABLE>


(1) The assumed exercise of options and warrants in periods of net loss are
    anti-dilutive and are not included in the computation and presentation of
    loss per Class 1 Interest.

(2) The assumed exercise of options, warrants, and conversion of Series A Class
    2 Interests are anti-dilutive but are included in the calculation of diluted
    loss per Class 1 Interest in accordance with Regulation S-K, Item 601 (a)
    (11).
RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 44 B

Corrective Action Beyond the Facility Boundary

FEDERAL ANALOGOUS

STATE ANALOG IS:

MORE

BROADFEDERAL RCRA STATE EQUIV- STRIN- ER IN

REQUIREMENT CITATION CITATJON ALENT GENT SCOPE

PART 264 - STANDARDS FOR THE OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS

WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

SUBPART F - RELEASES FROM SOUD WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS

CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM

new introductory

wording 264.100(e} WAC 173-303-645(1l)(e) X

compliance point/

downgradient

property boundary 264.100(e}(1) WAC 173-303-645(]] He) X

release beyond the

facility boundary 264.1 00(e)(2) WAC 173-303-645 (II He) X

CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR SOUD WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS

~.\ corrective action

beyond facility

boundaries 264.101(c) WAC 173-303-646{2{b)

December 1, 1987 - Page 3 of 8

X
#### Streater’s Estate.

Practice, *O. G.*— Fraud—Gross *laches.*

1. When a person against -whom an alleged fraud has been perpetrated lies by for twenty years, without causing it to be investigated, he will not then be permitted to show it. From So long an acquiescence, the presumption of law is conclusive that all was done rightly.

2. Appellants, upon the audit of the account of an administrator, claimed that certain fraud had been practiced upon one, under whom they claimed, by a trustee and a deceased attorney, some twenty years before the trustee’s death, and some twenty years be*143fore tbe death of the person against whom the fraud was alleged to have been perpetrated, and who never made any complaint of it. Held, it is now too late for the heirs of the person alleged to have been defrauded to do what he neglected to do during his lifetime.

Argued April 15, 1913.

Appeals, Nos. 127 and 129, Jan. T., 1913, by Edna Streater Pettebone and Margaret Streater, from decree of O. C. Luzerne Co., Year 1875, No. 566, dismissing exceptions to administrator’s account In re Estate of Charles Streater, deceased.

Before Brown, Mestrezat, Potter, Elkin and Moschzisker, JJ.

Affirmed.

Exceptions to administrator’s account. Before Freas, P. J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

The court dismissed the exceptions.

*Error assigned*was in dismissing the exceptions.

*John E. Jenkins*and *Will N. Leach,*for appellants.

*William, O. Price,*for appellee.

May 19, 1913:

Per Curiam,

By the account of the administrator of S. B. Sturdevant, the deceased trustee, as restated by the court below, the appellants will receive everything to which they are entitled. The matters of which they complain on this appeal occurred more than twenty years before the death of the trustee, and, if any fraud was practiced by him and his deceased attorney, it was upon Charles Streater, in depriving him of income which he ought to have received. He lived for twenty years after the alleged fraud was perpetrated, but never complained of it, and both appeals are dismissed on the following from the opinion of the court below: “The cash considerations mentioned in the deed and the assignment of the bank stock are small considering the length of time *144Streater lived, which was a chance that Byman took. It is clear that all the facts are not known by us, as the parties are all dead. It is now too late for Streater’s heirs to do what he neglected to do, as regards the income, during his lifetime: Church v. Winton, 196 Pa. 107; Campbell v. Boggs, 48 Pa. 524; Derr’s Est., 203 Pa. 96. The case of Kribbs v. Downing, 25 Pa. 399, involved the transactions of an attorney with his client, and the court disposes of the charges of fraud in the following words: ‘When a person, against whom a fraud has been perpetrated, lies by for twenty-one years without causing it to be investigated, he will not then be permitted to show it. From so long an acquiescence, the presumption of law is conclusive that all was done rightly.’ ”

Appeals dismissed at appellants’ costs.
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta name="pdf:PDFVersion" content="1.2">
<meta name="xmp:CreatorTool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="pdf:hasXFA" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:modify_annotations" content="true">
<meta name="dc:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="dcterms:created" content="1998-09-12T02:48:59Z">
<meta name="dcterms:modified" content="1998-09-12T02:49:00Z">
<meta name="dc:format" content="application/pdf; version=1.2">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator_tool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="access_permission:fill_in_form" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:modified" content="1998-09-12T02:49:00Z">
<meta name="pdf:hasCollection" content="false">
<meta name="pdf:encrypted" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Length" content="13128">
<meta name="pdf:hasMarkedContent" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Type" content="application/pdf">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print_faithful" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="pdf:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_for_accessibility" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:assemble_document" content="true">
<meta name="xmpTPg:NPages" content="1">
<meta name="pdf:hasXMP" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_content" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print" content="true">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.pdf.PDFParser">
<meta name="access_permission:can_modify" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:created" content="1998-09-12T02:48:59Z">
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div class="page"><p></p>
<p>b </p>
<p></p>
<div class="ocr">67 67

WITH DE AWN
AND Nor
REIGGUED
</div>

</div>
</body></html>
## EPA **Workshop for Communities**  **with Environmental** 

**Justice Concerns on Proposed**  **Rule to**  **Reduce Carbon Pollution**  **from Existing Power Plants** 

October 30

, 2014 9:00 am – 4:30 pm Crystal Gateway Marriott 1700 Jefferson Davis Highway Arlington, VA 22202 On June 2, 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency issued the proposed Clean Power Plan (CPP) rule
. This rule proposes state
-specific goals for reducing carbon dioxide from the power sector ; states will then need to make plans to to meet the goal . The proposed rule also promotes clean and renewable energy options. This is a federal rule that will have important implications for state air and energy policies. Therefore, we welcome stakeholders who have environmental justice concerns to participate and share perspectives about how the rule can be reflective and responsive to the needs of environmentally overburdened, underserved, and economically distressed communities across the country. If you are interested in learning how you can help your state achieve cleaner air, reduce the impacts of climate change, and promote renewable energy sources, it is importan t that you understand the Clean Power Plan
. You have an opportunity to help shape this r ule...come learn how! We encourage you to ta ke advantage of this 1
- day workshop , which will: ● Provide an overview of the Clean Power Plan proposed rule
. ● Prepare participants to engage effectively in th e public participation process
. ● Provide EPA staff with a better understanding of key community concerns about the CPP
. ● Provide information about the elements of the CPP that are important to communities with environmental justice concer n s . ● Provide information about how to participate in the public comment process, which is open until December 1 , 2014
. We look forward to your participation! To register for this event in
- person or online via Adobe Connect click here or visit the link below : http://events.constantcontact.com/register/event?llr=lzxnl5rab&oeidk=a07e9yvi0gjf3b864bc Special Notes about Online Participation:  If you plan to part icipate in this workshop online, you must register in order to receive the information to participate in the webinar. o In your registration, you must indicate that you are participating online “via Adobe Connect” o You will receive the information to participate in the webinar by October 29 th, 2014  Only a limited number of webinar slots are available (130 slots)
.  This is a pilot test for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation using Adobe Connect technologies during a public training workshop
. Technical difficulties may occur during the webinar with limited support available. We welcome your feedback on this session.  If you require special accommodations for participating in this webinar, please contact Holly Wilson ( wilson.holly@epa.gov) by Monday, October 27th. **REGISTER NOW!**