alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appellate case name: Robert Lee Lyles v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-14-00859-CV

Trial court case number: 2009-63597

Trial court: 151st Judicial District Court of Harris County

The panel has voted to deny appellant’s motion for rehearing.

1

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing is denied.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley

  Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Justices Keyes, Higley, and Brown

Date: April 14, 2015

 

1 Because appellant is pro se, we note that none of the cases in appellant’s motion address 

his situation here where his untimely notice of appeal deprived this Court of jurisdiction 

to consider the merits of his appeal, and we clarify that our memo opinion noted he must

file a bill of review in the trial court, not here. After the trial court’s plenary power 

expired, appellant’s only legal recourse is to file “[a] bill of review [which] is a new suit 

filed in the same court rendering the original judgment.” Urso v. Lyon Fin. Servs., Inc., 

93 S.W.3d 276, 280 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.) (citation omitted). 

Generally, a bill-of-review plaintiff must file his claim within four years of rendition of 

the judgment he attacks. See PNS Stores, Inc. v. Rivera, 379 S.W.3d 267, 275 (Tex. 

2012). Thus, appellant still has an available remedy by filing a bill of review in the trial 

court until four years after the October 4, 2013 final judgment, where he can try to prove 

lack of timely service of that judgment and, if unsatisfied, can then appeal any adverse 

bill-of-review decision to this Court.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Willie Thomas, Appellant.

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (William Wallace, III, J., at *Huntley*hearing, jury trial and sentence), rendered March 30, 1989, convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to 6 to 12 years imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

*448Defendant’s conviction arises out of his arrest with a codefendant for stealing food stamps from a resident of a Bronx County men’s shelter on April 11, 1988.

Defendant’s claim that the hearing court erred in denying suppression of a *post-Miranda*statement made by him, on the ground that the statement was the tainted product of pre*Miranda*custodial questioning, is without merit. The record indicates that defendant was not subject to custodial questioning before *Miranda*warnings were administered. The officer merely advised defendant of the accusation made against him, which does not constitute either formal questioning or its functional equivalent *(see, People v Gamble,*129 AD2d 470, *affd*70 NY2d 885).

Additionally, the *post-Miranda*statement made by defendant was not in response to any form of questioning, and thus would be admissible even if defendant had not voluntarily waived his rights *(see, e.g., People v Gonzales,*75 NY2d 938, *cert denied*— US —, 111 S Ct 99).

In view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, as well as the fact that defense counsel opened the door to cross-examination of defendant regarding his pre-arrest silence by direct questioning and testimony of pre-arrest conversation between defendant and the police, any error in the admission of such testimony is rendered harmless *(People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ross and Rubin, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24457-24458]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9828]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: 2012 Notice call for nominations.

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

SUMMARY: The National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council, 
(NUCFAC) will be filling four positions that will expire at the end of 
December 2012. Interested applicants may download a copy of the 
application and position descriptions from the U.S. Forest Service's 
Urban and Community Forestry Web site: www.fs.fed.us/ucf/.

DATES: Nomination(s) must be ``received'' (not postmarked) by May 31, 
2012.

ADDRESSES: Nomination applications by courier should be addressed to: 
Nancy Stremple, Executive Staff to National Urban and Community 
Forestry Advisory Council, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Yates Building 
(1 Central) MS-1151, Washington, DC 20250-1151. Please submit 
electronic nomination(s) to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d6b8a3b5b0b7b589a3b5b089a6a4b9a6b9a5b7baa596b0a5f8b0b3b2f8a3a5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5e302b3d383f3d012b3d38012e2c312e312d3f322d1e382d70383b3a702b2d">[email protected]</span></a>. The 
subject line should read: 2012 NUCFAC Nominations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Stremple, Executive Staff to the 
National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council, 1400 
Independence Avenue SW., Yates Building (1 Central) MS-1151, 
Washington, DC 20250-1151, phone 202-205-1054.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through 
Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Facsimiles will not be accepted as official 
nominations. Email or courier service is recommended. Regular mail 
submissions must be screened by the agency and may delay the receipt of 
the application up to a month.
    A total of four positions will be filled. The following four 
positions will serve a 3-year term from January 1, 2013, to December 
31, 2015:
    <bullet> One of two members representing a national non-profit 
forestry and/or conservation citizen organization;
    <bullet> A member representing city/town government;
    <bullet> One of two members representing academic institutions with 
an expertise in urban and community forestry activities;

[[Page 24458]]

    <bullet> Not officers or employees of any government body with a 
population of less than 50,000 and has experience and is active in 
urban and community forestry.

    Dated: April 16, 2012.
James E. Hubbard,
Deputy Chief, State & Private Forestry.
[FR Doc. 2012-9828 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO THE
SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.
PARTNER AGENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
   6.

    The following provision shall be added under Section IX. General Provisions:
 L.

    Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties, each party agrees that during
this Agreement and for a period of one (1) year after the termination or expiration of this
Agreement, it shall not directly or indirectly recruit, solicit or hire any employee of the
other party, or induce or attempt to induce any employee of the other party to discontinue
his or her employment relationship with the other party.
 7.

    The word treaty shall be deleted from Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line 1.8.

    The following clause shall be deleted in its entirety from Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line
1.:
  9.

    Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line 15. shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following:
  10.

    The following sentence shall be deleted in its entirety from Exhibit B, Other Defined Terms
used in this Agreement, Paragraph B:
 st st st st
    SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.BY:
    
    /s/ William S. LoderNAME: William S. LoderTITLE: Senior Vice President, Chief Underwriting OfficerAEON INSURANCE GROUP, INC.BY:
    
    /s/ Lee WendletonNAME: Lee WendletonTITLE: President
Order entered April 14, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00530-CR

ALBERT AYALA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1142504-L

ORDER

The State’s April 10, 2015 motion to extend the time for filing a brief is GRANTED. 

The State’s brief, received on April 10, 2015, is ORDERED filed as of the date of this order.

/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES 

PRESIDING JUSTICE
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    Form 8-K

                  CURRENT REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
                      THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                        Date of Report: December 9, 1996

                        BOONTON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION

                            A New Jersey corporation
                         Commission File Number 0-2364
                 I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 22-1543137

           25 Eastmans Road, PO Box 465, Parsippany, N.J. 07054-0465
                                 (201) 386-9696

    ITEM 5. OTHER EVENTS
            ------------

    On December 9, 1996, in accordance with the Subscription and Option
Agreement dated October 21, 1996, by and between Boonton Electronics Corporation
(BEC) and G.E.M. USA, Inc. (GEM), BEC received, from GEM, Two Hundred Thousand
Dollars ($200,000.00) for the purchase of 80,000 shares of authorized but
unissued common shares for Two Dollars and Fifty Cents ($2.50) per share. In
return BEC provided GEM with a stock certificate for the 80,000 shares of stock.
As a result of the above noted actions, all of the documents executed effective
October 21, 1996, pursuant to the Subscription and Option Agreement, became
effective on December 9, 1996.

    The Subscription and Option Agreement further provides an option to GEM for
an additional purchase of 443,700 shares of authorized but unissued common
shares for Three Dollars and Twenty-Four Cents ($3.24) per share or One Million
Four Hundred and Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Eighty-Eight Dollars
($1,437,588.00).


    EXHIBITS:  None
    --------

                                       40
<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURE

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the  undersigned
hereunto duly authorized.

                           BOONTON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION

                        By: /s/ John E. Titterton
                           -------------------------------
                                  John E. Titterton
                             Secretary/Treasurer and Vice
                                  President Finance

Dated: January 7, 1997

                                       41
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 12 (Thursday, January 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2737-2738]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-961]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material,

[[Page 2738]]

and personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis 
Panel; Drug Discovery for the Nervous System.
    Date: January 27, 2012.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Geoffrey G Schofield, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of 
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4040-A, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 
20892, (301) 435-1235, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bcdbd9d3dadaced9c5cffcdfcfce92d2d5d492dbd3ca"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dbbcbeb4bdbda9bea2a89bb8a8a9f5b5b2b3f5bcb4ad">[email protected]</span></a>.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 11, 2012.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-961 Filed 1-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<Page>

                                                                 ARTHUR ANDERSEN



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our report
dated March 20, 2002, covering the audited financial statements of variable
Account D, (and to all references to our Firm) included in or made a part of
this Registration Statement File No. 333-43886 for Fortis Benefits Insurance
Company Variable Account D on Form N-4.

Hartford, Connecticut                                    /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
April 17, 2002
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARIA MARTINEZ a/k/a MARIA B. MARTINEZ,

Appellant,

v.

ALS IV, LLC; Unknown Spouse of Maria B. Martinez a/k/a Maria 

Martinez; Any And All Unknown Parties Claiming By, Through, Under 

And Against The Herein Names Individual Defendant(s) Who Are Not 

Known To Be Dead Or Alive, Whether Said Unknown Parties May Claim 

An Interest As Spouses, Heirs, Devises, Grantees, Or Other Claimants; 

CLERK OF THE COURT PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; THE 

INDEPENDENT SAVINGS PLAN COMPANY d/b/a ISPC; ARROW 

FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC; PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; 

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; FIRST SELECT, 

INC., Unknown Tenant #1 In Possession Of The Property; Unknown 

Tenant #2 In Possession of the Property,

Appellees.

No. 4D13-3578

[ April 8, 2015 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Roger B. Colton, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502012CA013536.

Brian Korte of Korte and Wortman, P.A., West Palm Beach, for 

appellant.

Heidi J. Bassett of Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., Boca Raton, 

for Appellee-ALS IV, LLC.

PER CURIAM.

Maria B. Martinez appeals from a final judgment of foreclosure entered 

in favor of ALS IV, LLC (“ALS”). We affirm the final judgment of foreclosure, 

but reverse the award of attorney’s fees because ALS failed to present 

sufficient evidence to support the award. We reverse and remand the 

attorney’s fee order for additional findings, or an additional hearing, if 

necessary. See Rodriguez v. Campbell, 720 So. 2d 266, 268 (Fla. 4th DCA 

1998) (holding that when the party seeking attorney’s fees presents some 

competent substantial evidence supporting the fee, yet fails to include 
2

some essential evidentiary support, the appellate court will reverse and 

remand the order for additional findings).

Affirmed in part; Reversed in part and Remanded for further proceedings.

STEVENSON, TAYLOR and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Instructions for KC-1230 

AGENT AGREEMENT 

This is an agreement between the warehouse operators and the Commodity Credit 

Corporation to recognize another party as agent for the warehouse without limiting the 

responsibilities of the warehouse operator under a CCC Storage Agreement. 

Submit the original of the completed form in hard copy or facsimile to the Kansas City 

Commodity Office, P.O. Box 419205, Stop 8748, Kansas City, MO 64141-6205; FAX 

816-926-1426. For questions or assistance, contact Commodity Management Division, 

Storage Contract Branch at 816-926-6446. 

Features for transmitting the form electronically are available to those customers with 

access credentials only. If you would like to establish online access credentials with USDA, 

follow the instructions provided at the USDA eForms web site. 

Warehouse Operators must complete Items 1 through 6. 

Items 1-6 

Fld Name / 

Item No. 

Instruction 

1 

Agent Name 

Enter the name of the agent. 

2 

Warehouse 

Name 

Enter the name of the warehouse. 

3 Enter the number for the warehouse operator’s Storage Agreement 

Storage Number. 

Agreement 

Number 

4 

Warehouse 

Code No. 

Enter the warehouse code number assigned by CCC. If this Agent 

Agreement applies to multiple codes, attach a list. 

5 A – D 

Warehouse 

Signature 

Item 5A. Enter the name of the warehouse (company). 

Item 5B. Enter the City, State, and ZIP code of the warehouse. 

Item 5C. Enter the signature of an authorized individual, i.e., corporate 

officer, partner, member, or proprietor signing for the 

warehouse operator. 

Item 5D. Enter the title of the person signing for the warehouse 

operator. 

6 A – D 

Agent 

Signature 

Item 6A. Enter the name of the agent (company). 

Item 6B. Enter the City, State, and ZIP code of the agent. 

Page 1 of 2 
 

Fld Name / 

Item No. 

Instruction 

Item 6C. 

Item 6D. 

Enter the signature of an authorized individual signing for 

the agent. 

Enter the title of the person signing for the agent. 

Items 7A&B for CCC use only. 

Page 2 of 2
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 18

- 00116

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A .E., Z.E.,

AND E.E., CHILDREN

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

FROM THE 235TH DISTR ICT COURT OF COOKE C OUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. CV16

- 00599

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered A ppellant ’ s verified motion to withdraw her notice of

appeal from the trial court’s order terminating her parent

- child relationships with

children A.E., Z.E., and E.E. The motion specifically states, “After thoughtful

consideration, Appellant decided it was in the children ’ s best interest to abandon

the appeal.” It is the court ’ s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore,

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 PER CURIAM

PANEL: PITTMAN, W ALKER, and MEIER, JJ.

DELIVERED: June 14, 2018
|  | 1. | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,  and |
|--|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | 2. | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of      Registrant. |
|--|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                          |                                                                            |                     |
|-------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------|
| Dated:      November 23, 2009 |                                                                            | /s/      David M. Barnes |
|                          | David      M. Barnes, Chief Executive Officer(Principal      Executive Officer) |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-2370

RANDOLPH LEE DARNELL,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DARREN MARSHALL HART,

Movant - Appellant,

v.

SAM R. LLOYD; HULLIHENS LAWN CARE SERVICE, a/k/a Hullihen’s Lawn 

Care Service; HULLIHEN’S LAWN CARE, INC., trading as Hullihen’s Lawn Care,

Inc.,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Newport News. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (4:14-cv-00094-HCMLRL)

Submitted: July 20, 2018 Decided: July 25, 2018

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Darren M. Hart, HART & ASSOCIATES, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Kevin 

W. Mottley, THE MOTTLEY LAW FIRM PLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

In a prior appeal, we reviewed the district court’s award of quantum meruit

attorney’s fees and costs to Darren Marshall Hart in the matter of Darnell v. Lloyd, No. 

4:14-cv-00094-HCM-LRL (E.D. Va.). Although we concluded that the district court 

“thoroughly analyzed” each of the factors that must be considered in awarding such fees, 

we vacated the district court’s order and remanded with instructions to the district court to 

calculate and explain the basis for the fee award in light of, and with reference to, the 

factors specified in County of Campbell v. Howard, 112 S.E. 876, 885 (Va. 1922).

Darnell v. Hart, 689 F. App’x 195, 197 (4th Cir. 2017).

On remand, the district court complied with our instructions and provided additional 

analysis of the relevant factors and specified how its consideration of each of the factors 

affected its computation of the award of attorney’s fees to Hart. Although the district 

court’s computation resulted in an amount of fees less than that which was awarded upon 

the court’s prior consideration, the district court increased the fee amount to $7500, 

determining that this amount was “fair and reasonable under the circumstances.” We find 

that the district court fully complied with our direction on remand and that it did not abuse 

its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees to Hart. See McAfee v. Boczar, 738 F.3d 81, 88 

(4th Cir. 2013). 

Hart also challenges the award of $2,298.20 in costs, contending that he was entitled 

to a greater amount. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Darnell v. Hart, No. 
4

No. 4:14-cv-00094-HCM-LRL (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 15, 2017; entered Nov. 16, 2017). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

AFFIRMED