alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00645-CR

Lloyd Standley, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-DC-09-904065, HONORABLE BRENDA KENNEDY, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

PER CURIAM

Bryce Runkle, attorney for Lloyd Standley appointed on appeal, has filed a

motion requesting that he be allowed to withdraw as counsel for appellant. Runkle represents

that he has accepted employment as a judicial staff attorney beginning June 1, 2010, and that the

code of judicial conduct prohibits him from continuing to represent clients, including appellant. 

Runkle also requests that this Court abate this appeal and remand this cause to the

trial court for appointment of substitute counsel. Because the reporter’s record has been requested

but has not yet been filed, appellant’s brief is not yet due.

Runkle asserts that he notified appellant of his intent to file these motions. Appellant

has not filed any objection to these motions.
Both motions are granted. Runkle is allowed to withdraw as counsel for appellant. 

This appeal is abated and the cause remanded to the trial court for appointment of new counsel

unless appellant retains counsel, waives counsel, or is shown not to be indigent. New counsel shall 

make an appearance in this Court by filing a letter announcing that he or she represents Standley.

The deadline to file appellant’s brief is stayed. Appellant’s brief will be due 30 days

after (1) the reporter’s record is filed, and (2) counsel is appointed, retained, or waived—whichever

occurs later.

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Waldrop

Abated

Filed: April 29, 2010

Do Not Publish

2
| 1.     | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2011, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Rapid Holdings, Inc. |

|                                      | RAPID HOLDINGS, INC. |                                             |
|-------------------------------------------|----------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                                      |                 |                                             |   |
| Date:  April 13, 2011 | By:                  | /s/ Anthony Barron                               |   |
|                                      |                 | Anthony Barron                                   |   |
|                                      |                 | President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director |   |
|                                      |                 |                                             |   |
Appendix G





Modeling Results and Supplemental Analysis



Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation 

Division of Air Pollution Control 

9th Floor L&C Annex 

401 Church Street 

Nashville, TN 37243

Pre-Hearing Draft

Regional Haze SIP for TN Class I Areas

Appendix G - 1

January 18, 2008
Appendix G.1 

GEOS-CHEM Report 

Pre-Hearing Draft

Regional Haze SIP for TN Class I Areas

Appendix G - 2

January 18, 2008
Appendix G.2 

International Emissions Impact 

Pre-Hearing Draft

Regional Haze SIP for TN Class I Areas

Appendix G - 3

January 18, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                              13,694
<SECURITIES>                                         6,026
<RECEIVABLES>                                        8,643
<ALLOWANCES>                                         1,683
<INVENTORY>                                          3,412
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    33,590
<PP&E>                                              22,854
<DEPRECIATION>                                      14,063
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      46,823
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               10,067
<BONDS>                                              2,489
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                95
<OTHER-SE>                                          32,436
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        46,823
<SALES>                                             16,447
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    15,712
<CGS>                                                6,141
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        6,141
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     5,469
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      83
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      4,239
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1,479
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  2,760
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         2,760
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.25


</TABLE>
#### Herschel Dean LYLE, Appellant, v. Patricia A. LYLE, etc., Appellee.

No. 74-60.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 8, 1974.

Appeal dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
financial  statements for the three month period ended May 31, 1996 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000027850
<NAME>                        MARITIME TRANSPORT & TECHNOLOGY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     $
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              May-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 Mar-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   May-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00
        



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 161 (Monday, August 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 42170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17846]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Richard 
M. Osborne, Sr., et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-2039-CAB, was lodged with the 
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio on 
August 10, 2018.
    This proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed by the 
United States against Defendants Richard M. Osborne, Sr., Great Plains 
Exploration, LLC, Center Street Investments, Inc., Callendar Real 
Estate Development Company, LLC, and Osair, Inc., pursuant to Sections 
301(a), 309(b), and 309(d) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  
1311(a), 1319(b), and 1319(d), to obtain injunctive relief from and 
impose civil penalties against the Defendants for violating the Clean 
Water Act by discharging pollutants without a permit into waters of the 
United States. The proposed Consent Decree resolves these allegations 
by requiring the Defendants to restore the impacted areas and pay a 
civil penalty.
    The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to 
this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of 
publication of this Notice. Please address comments to Phillip R. 
Dupr[eacute], United State Department of Justice, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division, Post Office Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-
7611 and refer to United States v. Richard M. Osborne, Sr., et al., 
Case No. 1:11-cv-2039-CAB, DJ #90-5-1-1-18628.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Carl B. 
Stokes United States Courthouse, 801 West Superior Avenue, Cleveland, 
OH 44113. In addition, the proposed Consent Decree may be examined 
electronically at http://www.justice.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html.

Cherie L. Rogers,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Defense Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-17846 Filed 8-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE 3 MONTHS AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000             JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          38,792                  38,792
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,004                  24,004
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,030)                 (1,030)
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                64,201                  64,201
<PP&E>                                          13,408                  13,408
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,301)                 (5,301)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  74,561                  74,561
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,263                  30,263
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                       126,267                 126,267
<OTHER-SE>                                    (81,969)                (81,969)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    74,561                  74,561
<SALES>                                         23,194                  40,768
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,194                  40,768
<CGS>                                              166                     231
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,287                  14,608
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,699                  51,225
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 178                     771
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,970)                (25,836)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,970)                (25,836)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,970)                (25,836)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.21)                  (0.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.21)                  (0.49)


</TABLE>
AG ENDA Sergeant’s Pet Care Products, Inc. & PetLogic LLC Product - Specific Mitigation Meeting Thursday , July22 , 2010

I. Introductions and Purpose II. Sergeant’s Pet Care Products, Inc. & PetLogic LLC Presentation III. Agency Presentation & Response I V. Other Issues V. Questions and Answers VI. Next Steps
#### Roosevelt HOPKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-146.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 22, 1970.

Max B. Kogen, Miami, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Melvin Grossman and Bruce Scheiner, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Perkins v. State, Fla.1969, 228 So.2d 382; United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149; Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199; Pearson v. United States, 5th Cir.1968, 389 F.2d 684.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000             JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1                       1
<CASH>                                           5,199                   5,199
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   81,479                  81,479
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               237,005                 237,005
<PP&E>                                       2,012,322               2,012,322
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,010,229               2,010,229
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 500,687                 500,687
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,950,257               3,950,257
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                    569,022                 569,022
<COMMON>                                    15,826,058              15,826,058
<OTHER-SE>                                (19,844,650)            (19,844,650)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   500,687                 500,687
<SALES>                                            399                   2,927
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   399                   2,927
<CGS>                                              151                   (279)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,424                   4,896
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,040,241               7,399,971
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,713                  19,111
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,161,979)             (7,423,051)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                   2,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,161,979)             (7,423,051)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,161,979               7,243,051
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.11)                  (0.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)                  (0.52)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0465 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. MICHAEL LEE MARFUTA, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file the reply brief and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is given an extension of time until April 18, 2024, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 11 2024

03/11/2024
Case Number: DA 22-0465
See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not 1

required to do so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).

NUMBER 13-09-00380-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE THE STATE OF TEXAS EX REL. STEPHEN B. TYLER,

CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF VICTORIA COUNTY, TEXAS

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1

Relator, the State of Texas ex rel. Stephen B. Tyler, Criminal District Attorney of

Victoria County, Texas, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on July 7,

2009. The Court requested and received a response to the petition for writ of mandamus

from the City of Victoria, the real party in interest.
2

Mandamus relief may be granted if the relator shows that: (1) the act sought to be

compelled is purely ministerial; and (2) there is no adequate remedy at law. See Deleon

v. Dist. Clerk, 187 S.W.3d 473, 474 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (orig. proceeding). The relator

must have a “clear right” to the relief sought and the merits of the relief sought must be

“beyond dispute.” See id. “The requirement of a clear legal right necessitates that the law

plainly describes the duty to be performed such that there is no room for the exercise of

discretion.” Id. Mandamus may also issue to correct a void order. See, e.g., State ex rel.

Millsap v. Lozano, 692 S.W.2d 470, 482 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985). 

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus

and the response thereto, is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to

the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and 

filed this 29th day of July, 2009.
Exhibit 31.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, John Enwright, certify that:





1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Vera Bradley, Inc.; and





2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statement made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.


Date:  September 13, 2019/s/ John EnwrightJohn EnwrightChief Financial Officer
RE: ESA Letter to FWS Imminent 

Roger Kohn to: David Jenkins 12/22/2011 03:30 PM

I think we would note that the main proposed mitigation measure in the BA - funding in support of weeding 

efforts - is very generic. When we talked to FWS, they indicated that they will need more specificity 

regarding the 50 acres of weeding conservation measure, i.e., where specifically it will take place, when it 

will begin, what the long-term duration will be, frequency, what binding arrangement with the landowner 

will be made, etc., So we would just encourage you to move forward on that quickly if you are not doing so 

already.

Roger Kohn

USEPA Region 9 - Air Division (AIR-3)

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

415-972-3973 

kohn.roger@epa

"David Jenkins" I like the timing of your effort. Prior to sending t... 12/22/2011 03:18:40 PM

From: "David Jenkins" <davdjenk@gmail.com>

To: Roger Kohn/R9/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 12/22/2011 03:18 PM

Subject: RE: ESA Letter to FWS Imminent

I like the timing of your effort. Prior to sending the letter, can you share any insights? 

Best regards, 

Dave

From: Roger Kohn [mailto:Kohn.Roger@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:31 PM

To: David Jenkins; W. David Jenkins

Subject: ESA Letter to FWS Imminent

Dave,

In our Dec 9 meeting, you asked that we give you a heads up before sending our letter to the FWS to 

begin ESA consultation. I wanted to let you know that we're very close to sending the letter. Will 

probably send it tomorrow, Dec 23.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Roger Kohn

USEPA Region 9 - Air Division (AIR-3)

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

415-972-3973 

kohn.roger@epa