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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE>  7
<LEGEND>
This statement contains summary financial information
extracted from Integon Corporation's June 30, 1997
finacial statements and is qualified in its entirety
by references to such financial statements.   
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000
<CURRENCY>      U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           633,239
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          633,239
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            633,239
<EQUITIES>                                     0
<MORTGAGE>                                     0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 634,337
<CASH>                                         51,562
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             175,349
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         49,688
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,484,437
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                531,027
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            358,883
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                150,714
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    14
<COMMON>                                       173
<OTHER-SE>                                     173,065
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,484,437
<PREMIUMS>                                     394,585
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            19,313
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             (2,073)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 9,200
<BENEFITS>                                     355,411
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           99,801
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (57,296)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (20,508)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (36,788)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (36,788)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (2.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (2.51)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER
ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          34,132
<SECURITIES>                                     1,216
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,752<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     13,617
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                65,915
<PP&E>                                          26,162<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 100,778
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           45,436
<BONDS>                                          5,574
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   100,778
<SALES>                                        239,845
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               258,679
<CGS>                                          229,965
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  242,523
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,871)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (1,579)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,292)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,292)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.11)
<FN>
<F1>THE ASSET VALUES FOR RECEIVABLES AND PP&E REPRESENT AMOUNTS NET OF
ALLOWANCES AND DEPRECIATION, RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 21
  SUBSIDIARIES
    OF THE REGISTRANT
  State ofName of Subsidiary

Incorporation/Organization

Name under which Subsidiary does
    BusinessCHW LLC

Delaware

CHW LLCProvidence Insurance Company,
    Limited

A Bermudian Company

Providence Insurance Company,
    LimitedCatoSouth LLC

North Carolina

CatoSouth LLCCato of Texas L.P.

Texas

Cato of Texas L.P.Cato Southwest, Inc.

Delaware

Cato Southwest, Inc.CaDel LLC

Delaware

CaDel LLCCatoWest LLC

Nevada

CatoWest LLCCedar Hill National Bank

A Nationally Chartered Bank

Cedar Hill National Bankcatocorp.com, LLC

Delaware

catocorp.com, LLC  47
LAW OFFICES OF 

RICHARD B . SCHIRO 

rbschiro@schirolaw.com 

Ms. Lisa Matz 

Clerk 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

600 Commerce Street, Suite 200 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

2 70e FAIRMOUNT STREET 

DALLAS. TEXAS 7520 1·1956 

TELEPHONE 2 14. 52 1 .4994 

FACSIMILE 2 14 . 52 I . 3636 

April 16, 2015 

Re: Court of Appeals Number: 05-14-00175-CV 

Trial Court Case Number: DC-11-14821 

Style: Bernard Patrusky, Appellant 

v. 

Kenneth Bloomberg and Marilyn Bloomberg, Appellees 

Dear Ms. Matz: 

via electronic filing 

In response to your letter dated February 4, 2015, please be advised that I will 

present argument on behalf of Kenneth Bloomberg and Marilyn Bloomberg, Appellees. 

Very truly yours, 

~/f~ Richard B. Schiro 7~ 

RBS:scc 

cc: M. Kevin Queenan , Esq. (via fax). 

ACCEPTED

05-14-00175-CV

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

DALLAS, TEXAS

4/16/2015 2:18:04 PM

LISA MATZ

CLERK

 FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 4/16/2015 2:18:04 PM LISA MATZ Clerk
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby provides notice of the membership of its Performance Review Board (PRB) for the Commission's Senior Executive Service (SES) members. The function of this board is to make recommendations relating to the performance of senior executives in the Commission. This action is undertaken in accordance with Title 5, U.S.C., Section 4314(c)(4).

The Commission's PRB will remove the following member:

Joseph H. McClelland

Dated: January 2, 2013.

 Kimberly D. Bose,

 Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2013-00121 Filed 1-7-13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
**For fastest processing, please attach this form and a PDF shipping label in an email to DairySanitaryCerts@ams.usda.gov.

DA-247 (01/2013)

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program.  (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

 To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rufus Brown Jr., Appellant.

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Castellino, J.), rendered March 6, 1990, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

We reject defendant’s contention that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Where, as here, the People have justified the police interrogation, it was up to defendant to make the claim that he was represented by counsel on another pending charge of which the police had knowledge and to show that at the time of the interrogation he was represented by counsel on the earlier charge *(see, People v Rosa,*65 NY2d 380, 387). Defendant has failed to do this. In any event, the Court of Appeals has recently ruled that the right to counsel is not violated where a defendant is questioned by the police solely on matters unrelated to a prior pending charge even if the defendant was represented by counsel on the prior charge *(People v Bing,*76 NY2d 331). Additionally, in this case, given that the predicate for defendant’s arrest was a warrant for violation of a conditional discharge on the prior charge, the prior charge is not considered to have been a *pending*charge and therefore any duty to inquire as to whether defendant was represented by counsel on the prior charge did not apply *(see, People v Heller,*99 AD2d 787). Finally, we find no merit to defendant’s contention that the prison sentence he received as a predicate felon of 2 to 4 years was harsh and excessive. While the sentence was the harshest that could have been imposed,- defendant was told at the time of his plea that this was the sentence he might receive and the plea was in full satisfaction of a four-count indictment *(see, People v Hadden,*158 AD2d 856, *lov denied*76 NY2d 847).

Casey, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             As Adopted Pursuant To
                  Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

I, Paul A. Ormond, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Manor
Care, Inc. (the Company) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of
my knowledge:

         (1)  The Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period
              ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
              Commission on the date hereof (the Report) 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 Report fairly presents, in all
              material respects, the financial condition and result of
              operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in
              the Report.

/s/ Paul A. Ormond

Paul A. Ormond
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
August 8, 2003

                                       30
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 7 (Thursday, January 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2283-2284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00284]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR Sec.  50.7, notice 
is hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States v. DMH 
Partners North, LLC, et al., Civil Action No. 12-cv-3203 (RHK/LIB), was 
lodged with the United States District Court for the District of 
Minnesota on January 2, 2013.
    This proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed by the 
United States against DMH Partners North, LLC, Patrick T. Christiansen,

[[Page 2284]]

Michael J. Christiansen, and Donald Huber, pursuant to sections 301 and 
404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311 and 1344, to obtain 
injunctive relief and impose civil penalties against the Defendants for 
violating the Clean Water Act by discharging pollutants into waters of 
the United States without complying with the terms and conditions of a 
permit issued under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344, 
and for failing to comply with a compliance order regarding the permit 
violations. The proposed Consent Decree resolves these allegations by 
requiring Defendant DMH Partners North, LLC to perform mitigation 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 Assistant United 
States Attorney Ann M. Bildtsen, United States Attorney's Office, 600 
United States Courthouse, 300 South Fourth Street, Minneapolis, MN 
55415 and refer to United States v. DMH Partners North, LLC, et al., DJ 
<greek-i>90-5-1-1-1904.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, 300 South 
Fourth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55415. 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. 2013-00284 Filed 1-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00351-CR

The State of Texas

v.

James Banuelos

On appeal from the

117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 13-CR-1784-B

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 16, 2015.
# Sheet

United States Department of Agriculture - Agricultural Marketing ServicePackers and Stockyards Division		&P

*Some are mailing locations; please contact the business to verify physical address.  Firms with multiple plants may only be listed by the Headquarters location.
NOTICE OF APPEAL 

1

CAUSE NO. CC-15-00016-B 

POLYMATHIC PROPERTIES § IN THE COUNTY COURT 

 Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § 

 § AT LAW NO 2 

RICKEY LYONS and ALL OTHER §

OCCUPANTS 610 TRUMAN COURT §

DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS 75137 §

 Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 

 

AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL 

 COMES NOW Defendant, Rickey Lyons and files this, his Amended Notice of Appeal 

and for cause would show the following: 

I.

PARTIES 

 1. Plaintiff, Polymathic Properties can be served via its attorney of record Matthew 

Tadlock, esq. and Murrah and Killough, PLLC., 3000 Weslyan, Suite 305, Houston, Texas 

77027 .

 2. Defendant, Rickey Lyons resides in Dallas County and can be served via his

attorney of record, Nadine R. King-Mays, 1122 North Bishop Avenue, Suite E Dallas Texas 

75208. 

II.

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

 Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 25.1(d) Plaintiff makes this Notice of Appeal: 

(1) This is an appeal of the matter entitled and numbered: 

Polymathic Properties v. Rickey Lyons and All Occupants of 610 Truman Court, 

Duncanville Texas, TX 75137, Cause No. CC-15-00016-B in the County Court at Law 

No. 2.

FILED

4/15/2015 3:48:51 PM

JOHN F. WARREN

COUNTY CLERK

DALLAS COUNTY

05-15-00408-CV

 FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 4/16/2015 10:10:05 AM LISA MATZ Clerk
NOTICE OF APPEAL

2

(2) The appeal is being taken from the Court’s February 10, 2015 Order granting Plaintiff’s 

petition for forcible detainer and Writ of Possession. (Exh A – attached).

(3) Rickey Lyons desires to Appeal.

(4) This Appeal is being taken to the Texas Fifth District Court of Appeals.

(5) The party filing this Notice is Defendant, Rickey Lyons.

Respectfully submitted,

/S/ Nadine R. King-Mays

__________________________

Nadine R. King-Mays

State Bar No. 11473400

The King-Mays Firm

1122 North Bishop Avenue

Suite E

Dallas, Texas 75208

nrkingmays@king-mays.com

214/942-2842 Telephone

972/996-7789 Telefax

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

RICKEY LYONS

Certificate of Service

I certify that the foregoing will be delivered to counsel for Plaintiffs. Matthew Tadlock, 

and Murrah and Killough, this 15th day of April 2015 via email, facsimile and/or via regular 

mail.

/S/ Nadine R. King-Mays

______________________

Nadine R. King-Mays
# Sheet

Entities Whose Registration Has Expired	

&D	ERO is PSD's Eastern Regional OfficeMRO is PSD's Midwestern Regional OfficeWRO is PSD's Western Regional Office	&P of &N
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: April 16, 2015 519469 

________________________________

In the Matter of JD STATION

PLAZA REALTY INC.,

Appellant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR,

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: February 9, 2015

Before: Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, JJ.

__________

Jeffrey Schwartz, New Rochelle, for appellant.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City

(Steven Koton of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Lahtinen, J.P.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal

Board, filed July 3, 2014, which assessed JD Station Plaza Realty

Inc. for additional unemployment insurance contributions.

Following an audit, JD Station Plaza Realty Inc. was

assessed $1,519.18 in unemployment insurance contributions based

upon remuneration it paid to John DeRaffele, its sole shareholder

and president. Because JD Station is a subchapter S corporation,

its net income during the period in question passed through to

DeRaffele, who reported it on his personal income tax returns

(see 26 USC § 1366). The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board

accordingly found that JD Station was liable for additional

unemployment insurance contributions, and JD Station now appeals.
-2- 519469 

We affirm. "Any employer shall become liable for

contributions under this article if he [or she] has paid

remuneration of [$300] or more in any calendar quarter" (Labor

Law § 560 [1]). Remuneration, in turn, "is defined to include

'every form of compensation for employment paid by an employer to

his [or her] employee'" (Matter of Chernavsky [Commissioner of

Labor], 76 AD3d 739, 740 [2010], quoting Labor Law § 517 [1]). 

DeRaffele was not paid a salary despite performing services for

JD Station, but nevertheless received the net income from the

corporation. Substantial evidence thus supports the Board's

finding that "the corporation's [s]ubchapter S net income was

. . . remuneration," notwithstanding DeRaffele's contention that

he invested most of that income back into JD Station (Matter of

Ellenbogen Computer Servs. [Hudacs], 202 AD2d 825, 826 [1994];

see Matter of R.S. Smero, Inc. [Levine], 51 AD2d 273, 276 [1976];

see also Matter of Preferred Computer Trading Corp. [Hartnett],

173 AD2d 1031, 1031-1032 [1991]).

McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court