alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### SPINKS v. STATE.

No. 25442.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 31, 1951.

T. R. Odell, Haskell, Thomas L. Blanton, Albany, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction for driving while intoxicated with a fine of $50.00 and ten days in j ail.

The appellant is charged with driving a motor vehicle on a highway in Jones County while intoxicated, on the 24th day of February, 1951. Apparently there is no contest of the charge of being under the influence of intoxicating liquor and the principal question presented on the appeal is whether or not the state introduced evidence to support a finding that appellant was the driver of the car.

The evidence and all of the evidence on this subject is found in the following statement by George Newell, Constable in the town of Lueders. “They hit a big sign post — a Texaco sign. Spinks’ car hit that sign post. The reason I went down to investigate was that I heard a crash and went down there. When I got there, I saw Spinks coming out of the car on the left hand side — under the steering wheel. I got to the wreck as fast as I could. I was walking. Mr. Spinks was coming out of the driver’s side of the car.”

The following testimony is given on cross-examination: “I saw Mr. Spinks getting out of the car on the left hand side. I don’t remember who was there. When I saw Mr. Spinks, he was holding the door. I didn’t see him drive this car. I don’t know who was driving the car at the time.”

The defendant testified that he was not the driver of the car which he said was driven by Bunkey Bowman when it ran into a post in Lueders. A lady testified, in his behalf, that she passed appellant and Bowman who were parked by the side of the road and saw them getting into their car with Bowman on the driver’s side. Immediately thereafter they passed her, driving much faster, and that when she came up to the scene of the wreck the parties had left the car. There is other evidence to the same effect. Another witness testified that when the wreck occurred Bunkey Bowman fled from the scene and went toward the depot. Bowman was not called as a witness in the case either by appellant or by the state.

The quoted evidence is insufficient to show that appellant was the driver, in the absence of other circumstances which we do not find in the case. The state makes the argument that because defendant did not call Bowman the presumption will rest that he would not support' appellant’s defense. The constable testified that he knew Bunkey Bowman and it occurs to us that if he would make a witness in behalf of the state he might have been called. We see no reason why either side may claim a supporting presumption.

*174Because the evidence is insufficient to show that appellant was the driver of the car, the jury’s verdict is not supported. The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5434 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5434

 To suspend temporarily the duty on lightweight digital camera lenses 
                 measuring approximately 70 mm or more.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

  Mr. Israel introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on lightweight digital camera lenses 
                 measuring approximately 70 mm or more.

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

SECTION 1. LIGHTWEIGHT DIGITAL CAMERA LENSES MEASURING APPROXIMATELY 70 
              MM OR MORE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Lenses designed     Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          for digital                                                       12/31/2014
                          cameras, the
                          foregoing with a
                          focal length
                          measuring
                          approximately 70
                          mm or more but
                          not over 200 mm
                          and weighing
                          between 1,535 and
                          1,545 grams
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          9002.11.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.15.4      Quaker City Bank Change in Control Agreement Renewal and
                     Extension Acknowledgment between Quaker City Bank and Hank
                     H. Kadowaki dated July 1, 2001.


                                QUAKER CITY BANK
                          CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT
                      RENEWAL AND EXTENSION ACKNOWLEDGMENT



Name of Participant:              Hank H. Kadowaki
                    --------------------------------------------------------




The undersigned participant does hereby acknowledge that, at their regularly
scheduled meeting  on June 21, 2001, the Board of Directors of Quaker City Bank
acted to renew and extend the Quaker City Bank Change in Control Agreement with
the undersigned participant to a full twenty-four (24) month term, until June
30, 2003.


Dated this ___1st___ day of ____July____, A.D., ______2001_______.



                              QUAKER CITY BANK


   /s/ Hank H. Kadowaki            By:  /s/ Frederic R. McGill
 ------------------------             --------------------------
Participant                             President
EXHIBIT 32

 

 

 

CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO REQUIRED BYRULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OFTHE U. S. CODE

 

 

 

I certify,to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended June 30, 2003 of Norfolk Southern Railway Company fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofNorfolk Southern Railway Company.

 

 

 
| Signed: | /s/ David  R. Goode                    |
|---------|----------------------------------------|
|    | David R.  Goode                        |
|    | President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|    | Norfolk  Southern Railway Company      |

 

Dated: Oct. 30, 2003

 

 

 

 

I certify,to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended June 30, 2003 of Norfolk Southern Railway Company fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofNorfolk Southern Railway Company.

 

 

 
| Signed: | /s/ Henry  C. Wolf                          |
|---------|---------------------------------------------|
|    | Henry C.  Wolf                              |
|    | Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |
|    | Norfolk  Southern Railway Company           |

 

Dated: Oct. 30, 2003
1388642 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 

JENAM TECH, LLC, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

GOOGLE LLC, 

 Defendant. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CIVIL ACTION No. 6:20-cv-00453-ADA 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

DECLARATION OF MELISSA HARRELL IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT GOOGLE 

LLC’S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE 

FILED UNDER SEAL

Case 6:20-cv-00453-ADA Document 26-1 Filed 08/12/20 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           24,234
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   101,396
<ALLOWANCES>                                     10,963
<INVENTORY>                                      70,287
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                205,839
<PP&E>                                           78,889
<DEPRECIATION>                                   47,655
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  317,097
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           136,298
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                          3,154
<OTHER-SE>                                      139,111
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    317,097
<SALES>                                          93,925
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 93,925
<CGS>                                            47,793
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    47,793
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 36,907
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  1,663
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  413
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   7,230
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2,892
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               4,338
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                      4,338
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       .28
        



<FN>
Note:  AS PER FASB STATEMENT NO. 128, EARNINGS PER SHARE, "PRIMARY"
       IS NOW "BASIC".
</FN>



</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5460 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on copper oxychloride and copper 

hydroxide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on copper 

oxychloride and copper hydroxide. 

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

3 SECTION 1. COPPER OXYCHLORIDE AND COPPER HYDROX4 IDE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.40.55 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 copper oxychloride and copper hydroxide) is amended by 

8 striking the date in the effective period column and insert9 ing ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5460 IH

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

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

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

- - - - - - - -

NO. 16-0122

LAZO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., W&R

TECHNOLOGY LLC D/B/A ATS

SOUTH D/B/A ADVANCED

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS SOUTH

AND EDDIE HILL D/B/A HILL

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

v.

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY,

GARRETT GOETERS, DAN

WAMPLER, SHEARRARD THOMAS

AND DOES 1-5 §

§

§

§

§

§ Dallas County,

5th District.

April 22, 2016

Petitioners' petition for review, filed herein in the above numbered and styled case, having

been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.

         

I, BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE

, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas, do hereby certify that

the above and attached is a true and correct copy of the orders of the Supreme Court of Texas in the

case numbered and styled as above, as the same appear of record in the minutes of said Court under

the date shown.

It is further ordered that petitioners, LAZO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., W&R TECHNOLOGY

LLC D/B/A ATS SOUTH D/B/A ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS SOUTH AND

EDDIE HILL D/B/A HILL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, pay all costs incurred on this petition.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Supreme Court of Texas, at the City of Austin, this the

2nd day of June, 2016

.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

By Monica Zamarripa, Deputy Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

MARIA GUADALUPE REYES GAONA, §

TOMAS TORRES CURIEL, ANDRES §

PONCE QUINTERO, JORGE BECERRA §

ORTIZ, FRANCISCO CARBAJAL, and §

MARCOS JOSE BARBOZA VALLENILLA, §

§

Petitioners, §

§

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-20-CA-473-FB

§

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF §

HOMELAND SECURITY; CUSTOMS AND §

BORDER PROTECTION (CBP); §

IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS §

ENFORCEMENT (ICE); DEPARTMENT OF §

JUSTICE; WILLIAM P. BARR, ATTORNEY §

GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES; §

CHAD F. WOLF, ACTING SECRETARY §

OF THE U.S. DHS; DANIEL BIBLE, ICE §

FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR; AND §

RAYMOND CASTRO, WARDEN, §

SOUTH TEXAS DETENTION CENTER, §

GEO GROUP, INC., §

§

Respondents. §

J U D G M E N T

The Court considered the Judgment to be entered in the above-styled and numbered cause.

Consistent with theOrderAccepting andRecommendation of United States Magistrate Judge

filed in this cause on this same date,

It is herebyORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Report and Recommendation

of United States Magistrate Judge (docket #47), is ACCEPTED such that: (1) Respondents’ Motion

to Dismiss Amended Petition (docket #14) is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim on which reliefmay be granted; (2) Petitioners’
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (docket #16) which the Court converted to a Motion for

Preliminary Injunction (see docket #39) is DISMISSED AS MOOT and also for failure to

demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits; and (3) Petitioners’ Motion for Expedited

Discovery(docket #40) is DISMISSED AS MOOT. Motions pending, if any, are also DISMISSED,

and this case is now CLOSED.

It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 22nd day of October, 2020.

 _________________________________________________

FRED BIERY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-
NO. 2014

- CV -7001705

- D2

NORTHTOWN DEVELOPMENT, INC. § IN THE DISTRICT COURT And GATEWAY CENTENNIAL § DEVELOPMENT, CO. (Successors- in - § Interest to Trautmann Investment § Properties, Ltd.), §

Plaintiffs § § V. § 11 1 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT § CIT YOF LAREDO, §

Defendant § WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS

NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL

MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT:

NOW COMES DEFENDANT CITY OF LAREDO and files this Notice of Appeal from the

trial court’s Order dated November 12, 2015, pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §51.014(a)(8)

and would respectfully show the Court the following:

Defendant hereby appeals this Court’s denying of Defendant ’s plea to the jurisdiction as

detailed in the 11 1 th Judicial District’s order signed on November 12, 2015 (Exhibit A) to the Fourth

Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas. This notice was filed prior to the deadline for filing this Notice

of Appeal, which is twenty (20) days from the date the trial court signed the challenged order.

Pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem Code §51.014(b), this interlocutory appeal stays the

commencement of trial in this case and all other proceedings. The City’s plea was filed pursuant to the

court’s scheduling order. Filed 11/20/2015 11:04:24 AM Esther Degollado District Clerk Webb District Ana Hernandez 2014CV7001705D2Filed11/20/2015 11:04:24 AMEsther DegolladoDistrict ClerkWebb DistrictAna Hernandez2014CV7001705D2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                              39,430
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      404,042
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         32,164
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   517,214
<PP&E>                                           5,602,729
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,875,284
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,910,818
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              769,944
<BONDS>                                            978,882
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           111,388
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,570,269
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,910,818
<SALES>                                            955,960
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,123,570
<CGS>                                              807,984
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      879,480
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    82,579
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  22,810
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    104,822
<INCOME-TAX>                                        34,956
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 69,866
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        69,866
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .62
        


</TABLE>
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   In connection with the Report of Castle Arch Real Estate Investment Company, L.L.C. a California limited liability company (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) I, Kirby D. Cochran, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:  a. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and  b. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.    /s/ Kirby D. Cochran Kirby D. Cochran, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)  Dated October 12, 2007
#### Careefe Burgess, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Dawn Burgess, et al., Appellants, v City of New York et al., Respondents, Linden Plaza, Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent; Lance Investigation Service, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated June 14, 1989, as denied their cross motion "for continuation of the examination before trial” of the defendant Linden Plaza, Inc., and for production of certain records.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court’s limitation of disclosure to those incidents that took place in the area of the ramp where the plaintiff was injured was within that court’s sound discretion and should not be disturbed *(see, Kolody v Supermarkets Gen. Corp.,*163 AD2d 276; *Zimmerman v New York City Tr. Auth.,*115 AD2d 738; *Jackson v Nelson,*81 AD2d 677; 7 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5501.22). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
      32(b)








This
      Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise
      subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification shall
      not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other
      document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated
      in
      such filing.








Certification
      Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63


of
      Title
      18 of the United States Code








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of the Companies (as defined below) on
      Form
      10-Q (the “Reports”) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Holly Keller
      Koeppel, the chief financial officer of





Southwestern
      Electric Power Company





(the
      “Companies”), certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, based on my knowledge (i)
      the Reports fully comply with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the
      Reports fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Companies.








/s/
      Holly Keller Koeppel_


Holly
      Keller Koeppel


Chief
      Financial Officer








November
      2, 2007








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      American Electric Power Company, Inc. and will be retained by American Electric
      Power Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or
      its staff upon request.