alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                      
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                        
|View History: Annual                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                  
|View History:                                                         
|                                                                      
|Texas (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                      
|                                                                      
|Texas (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1  | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8  | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------- | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |         |        |        |        |        |        | 17,256 | 22,667  | 28,167
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 38,048 | 49,588  | 44,778 | 49,055 | 54,158 | 42,626 | 56,577 | 78,666 | 100,789 | 93,477
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 87,296 | 116,848 |        |        |        |        |        |        |         |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
|                                                                                                
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                            
|View History:                                                                                   
|                                                                                                
|Louisiana (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                
|                                                                                                
|Louisiana (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 244   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 48     | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
Exhibit 99.1

Financial statement scheduleRule 12-09.

Valuation and qualifying accounts.

YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2003

|                                |  |   |   | Column CAdditions |   |   |  |  
|------------------------------- |  | - | - | ------------------ | - | - |  | -
|
|
|Allowance for doubtful accounts |  | $ |  |                    | $ |  |  | $

YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2004

|                                |  |   |   | Column CAdditions |   |         |  |  
|------------------------------- |  | - | - | ------------------ | - | ------- |  | -
|
|
|Allowance for doubtful accounts |  | $ |  |                    | $ | 100,000 |  | $

YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2005

|                                |  |   |         | Column CAdditions |   |        |  |  
|------------------------------- |  | - | ------- | ------------------ | - | ------ |  | -
|
|
|Allowance for doubtful accounts |  | $ | 100,000 |                    | $ | 50,000 |  | $

---



QuickLinks
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4524 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on yarn of carded cashmere 

19.35 metric yarn count or higher. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 24, 2012 

Mr. COURTNEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on yarn of carded 

cashmere 19.35 metric yarn count or higher. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. YARN OF CARDED CASHMERE 19.35 METRIC 

4 YARN COUNT OR HIGHER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.03.02 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 yarn of carded cashmere of 19.35 metric yarn count or 

8 higher) is amended by striking the date in the effective 

9 period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4524 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 subsection (a) apply with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### WHEELER v. TACKETT et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 26, 1954.

C. F. See, Jr., Louisa, for appellant.

Eldred E. Adams, Louisa, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment awarding a private passway to George and William V. Tackett over the land of T. D. Wheeler apd allowing damages of $30 to the latter as the value of the land taken for this purpose. We conclude the evidence supports the verdict of the jury that the establishment .of the passway was one of practical necessity within the, purview of KRS 381.580; that the finding as to damages was not inadequate; that the instructions were pot erroneous; and that permitting one. of. the commissioners, L. E. Wallace, to testify concerning the value of the land taken. was not incompetent.

The motion is overruled and the "judgment is affirmed.
#### COX et al. v. WICKS et al.

No. 2733.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Waco.

April 8, 1948.

G. Q. Youngblood, Joe H. Jones and Bern Wilson, all of Dallas, for appellant.

Ben D. Atwell and Irwin & Irwin, all of Dallas, for appellees.

TIREY, Justice.

This is a child custody case. The trial court in his judgment found substantially that the material allegations of plaintiffs’ and intervener’s petitions were false and that Mrs. Loy Wicks, the mother, was a proper person to have the care, custody and education of John Lambert Stephens, Jr., and awarded the child to his mother. There was no request for findings of fact and conclusions of law and none was filed.

The cause was transferred from the Dallas Court of Civil Appeals to our court by order of the Supreme Court and at a former day of this term this court was of the opinion that the district court of Dallas county was without jurisdiction to hear and determine the case and did not pass upon any other assignments. Cox v. Wicks, Tex.Civ.App., 203 S.W.2d 979. The Supreme Court granted writ of error and held that thé district court of Dallas county did have jurisdiction of the subject matter and the judgment of this court was reversed and the cause remanded to this court (Tex.Sup., 208 S.W.2d 876), with instructions to pass upon the other assignments. The pertinent facts with relation to this case are accurately stated in the foregoing opinions.

Point 5 is: “The greater weight of the evidence showing that appellees were not fit and suitable persons to have the care and custody of said minor child, and that *276it was not to the best interests and welfare of the said minor child, the trial court abused its sound discretion and committed reversible error in finding that they were such suitable persons and awarding the child’s custody to appellees.” Point 3 is to the same effect.

Under the doctrine announced by our Supreme Court in State ex rel. Wood v. Deaton, 93 Tex. 243, 54 S.W. 901, the appellants had the burden of showing that the best interest of the child required that his mother be deprived of his custody. After a careful review of the testimony adduced, we cannot say that they have carried such burden. The trial court had an opportunity to see the mother and hear her testimony, as well as that of her husband, the stepfather, who said in effect that he was anxious, to have the responsibility of being a father to the child, as well as to see all the other witnesses and hear their testimony, and after carefully reviewing the Statement of Facts we cannot say that the evidence adduced was such that we feel we should disturb the judgment of the tri-al court in awarding the care and custody of this child to his mother. The rule (and the reason therefor) governing the courts in the disposition of child custody cases is clearly stated in State ex rel. Wood v. Deaton, supra, and our Supreme Court has never departed therefrom.

We have considered each of the other assignments and each is overruled.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4634 

To extend the suspension of duty on 2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Mr. ALTMIRE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the suspension of duty on 2,3- 

Dichloronitrobenzene. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. 2,3-DICHLORONITROBENZENE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.22.20 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene) is amended by striking the date 

7 in the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 this section applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4634 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
|                                                                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                                
|View History:                                                                                       
|                                                                                                    
|Louisiana - North Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                    
|Louisiana - North Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 1      | 8      | 3      | 1     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 3      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 00235

- CR

F RANCISCO N OEL M ARTINEZ

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from County Criminal

Court No. 5

of Tar rant County (1544967)

March 28, 2019

Opinion by Justice Bassel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was error in the trial court’s judgment. The judgment is modified to reflect that

punishme nt was assessed by the trial court. It is ordered that the judgment of the

trial court is affirmed as modified.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

__ /s/ Dabney Bassel

__________________ Justice Dabney Bassel
#### FLORES v. STATE.

No. 26821.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 2, 1954.

*117No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The first count of the information charged appellant with the offense of selling whisky in a dry area, while the second count alleged the unlawful possession of liquor for the purpose of sale in a dry area. Finding appellant guilty under both counts, the jury assessed the punishment at a fine of $1,000 and six months in jail.

All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented for review by this court as the record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception.

The judgment is affirmed.
|                                                                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                       
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                                   
|View History: Annual                                                                                   
|View History:                                                                                          
|                                                                                                       
|Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                       
|                                                                                                       
|Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                       

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 1      | 0      | 0      | 1      | 0      | 0      | 1      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 10 January 2006

in Case C-222/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione in Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze v Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze SpA, Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di San Miniato, Cassa di Risparmio di San Miniato SpA (1)

(State aid - Articles 87 EC and 88 EC - Banks - Banking foundations - Meaning of ‘undertaking’ - Relief from direct tax on dividends received by banking foundations - Categorisation as State aid - Compatibility with the common market - Commission Decision 2003/146/EC - Determination of validity - Inadmissibility - Articles 12 EC, 43 EC and 56 EC - Principle of non-discrimination - Freedom of establishment - Free movement of capital)

(2006/C 48/11)

Language of the case: Italian

In Case C-222/04: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy), made by decision of 23 March 2004, received at the Court on 28 May 2004, in the proceedings between Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze and Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze SpA, Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di San Miniato, Cassa di Risparmio di San Miniato SpA — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, R. Silva de Lapuerta and G. Arestis, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; M. Ferreira, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 10 January 2006, in which it ruled:

----

(1)OJ C 190 of 24.07.2004.

----
#### ROBINSON v. BAX.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 7, 1952.

Robert W. Zollinger, Louisville, for appellant.

Frank Ropke, ¡Lawrence G. Duncan, Louisville, A. E. Funk, Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.' ‘ " .

COMBS', Justice. '

This appeal is from a judgment denying the petition for, a writ of habeas corpus. Criminal Code of Practice, 429-1. At the time the petition was filed petitioner was confined, in, the Jefferson County jail. The Commonwealth has filed motion to dismiss, the appeal, supported by certified statement pf the clerk of the court that the petitioner is now at liberty under bond to appear for trial.

It is elementary that the writ of habeas corpus is appropriate only in those cases where there is an actual or physical, restraint of the person. The rule is stated in 14 A.L.R. 344: "It is well settled that a person out on hail is not so restrained of his liberty as to be entitled to a writ of habeas corpus. An actual or physical restraint is required in order that such a writ may issue.”

Also see Ex parte Ford, 160 Cal. 334, 116 P. 757, 35 L.R.A.,N.S., 882; Johnson v. Hoy, 227 U.S. 245, 33 S.Ct. 240, 57 L.Ed. 497; Ex parte Powell, 191 Wash. 152, 70 P.2d 778.

The appeal must be dismissed and it is so ordered.