alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### R. C. PARKER et at., Appellants, v. SAN JACINTO COUNTY WATER CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 et al., Appellees.

No. A-4782.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Dec. 15, 1954.

Jeff Cochran, Cleveland, James E. Faulkner, Coldspring, for appellants.

George B. Darden and Gerald Creighton, Jr., Conroe, Kirby Kelley, Shepherd, Dumas, Huguenin & Boothman, Dallas, for appellees.

WILSON, Justice.

The sole question presented in this direct appeal is the constitutionality of a portion of Art. 7880-3a, R.C.S. This statute delegates to a water control and improvement district the power to install a sanitary and storm sewer disposal system financed by tax-supported bonds. This delegation of power is claimed to be unauthorized by the Constitution.

The defendant district has sold $50,000 worth of bonds and proposes to use the money in the construction of a sewer disposal system.

Plaintiffs (appellants here), tax-paying real property owners within the district, seek an injunction to prevent the expenditure of this money. They contend that the sewer powers conferred by Art. 7880-3a, R.C.S., are not authorized by either Sec. 52, Art. 3, or Sec. 59a, Art. 16, of the Texas Constitution, Vernon’s Ann.St., and for that reason the act is unconstitutional, citing Tri-City Fresh Water Supply District No. 2 v. Mann, 135 Tex. 280, 142 S.W.2d 945; Deason v. Orange County Water Control and Improvement District No. One, 151 Tex. 29, 244 S.W.2d 981; and Harris County Water Control and Improvement District No. 39 v. Albright, Tex., 263 S.W.2d 944.

Plaintiffs’ attack upon the statute fails because the power to erect and operate a sewerage disposal plant is clearly within Sec. 59a, Art. 16, Texas Constitution. The water brought into the area by the district is not destroyed by use but must be returned to the hydrological cycle. The Conservation Amendment to our State Constitution would certainly permit the purification of water before it returns to the groundwater table and the river system. The protection of the purity of the waters of this State is a public right and duty under the Conservation Amendment. Arts. 698b and 1362, Vernon’s Penal Code, and Art. 4444, R.C.S., plainly declare the pollution of public waters to be against the public policy of the State and provide appropriate sanctions to implement this policy.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Costs are taxed against plaintiffs below.
Exhibit 99.1

                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS

I, James M. Papada, III, Chief Executive Officer of Technitrol, Inc., certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September
      27, 2002 (the "Periodic Report") which this statement accompanies 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

(2)   information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Technitrol, Inc.

Dated: November 7, 2002


                                                        /s/ James M. Papada, III
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        James M. Papada, III
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 203 (Thursday, October 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 62738]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26859]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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, 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: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel Lung Image Data Base Resource for Imaging Research.
    Date: November 9, 2000.
    Time: 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Ramada Inn Rockville, 1775 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 
20852.
    Contact Person: Gerald G. Lovinger, PHD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Grants Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of 
Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8070, Rockville, MD 20892-
7405, 301/496-7987.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 11, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-26859 Filed 10-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
MARION W. KASPARIE, JR., ) ) Movant-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. SD34400 ) Filed: October 6, 2016 STATE OF MISSOURI, ) ) Respondent-Respondent. ) )
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF POLK COUNTY Honorable Lisa Carter Henderson, Associate Circuit Judge REVERSED AND REMANDED Marion Kasparie, Jr. (Movant) appeals from the denial of his pro se Rule 29.15 motion. 1 He contends the motion court clearly erred by denying Mova nt’s motion without appointing counsel to represent Movant, as required by Rule 29.15(e). Because this contention has merit, we reverse the orde r denying relief and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 2

1 All rule references are to Missouri Court Rules (2016).

2 The State concedes the case must be remanded because of this error.After a jury trial, Defend ant was found guilty of second-degree domestic assault. The trial court imposed a seven-year senten ce, suspended execution of same and placed Movant on probation for five ye ars. This Court affirmed Movant’s conviction on direct appeal. Mandate issued on January 27, 2016. On February 17, 2016, Movant filed a timely pro se Rule 29.15 motion. See Rule 29.15(b). The motion included a completed and notarized in forma pauperis affidavit. On March 11, 2016, the motion court denied relief without having appointed c ounsel to represent Movant . This appeal followed. We review the motion court’s ruling for clear error. Rule 29.15(k); Williams v. State , 168 S.W.3d 433, 439 (Mo. banc 2005). In releva nt part, Rule 29.15(e) states that “[w]hen an indigent movant files a pro se motion, the cour t shall cause counsel to be appointed for the movant.” Id . As Movant contends, the mo tion court’s failure to appoint counsel was clearly erroneous. See Bain v. State , 59 S.W.3d 625, 627 (Mo. App. 2001); Stroud v. State , 978 S.W.2d 785, 786 (Mo. App. 1998); State v. Wendleton , 936 S.W.2d 120, 124 (Mo. App. 1996). The order denying relie f is reversed. The cause is remanded for appointment of counsel and furthe r proceedings pursuant to Rule 29.15.

JEFFREY W. BATES, P.J. – OPINION AUTHOR DON E. BURRELL, J. – CONCUR MARY W. SHEFFIELD, C.J. – CONCUR
JESSE JAMES PHILLIPS

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 5367

___ __________________________/

Opinion filed March 8, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Bay County

. James B. Fensom , Judge

.

Jesse James Phillips, pro se , Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, At torney General, and Jillian H. Reding, Assistant A ttorney

General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., SWANSON, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 17

- 00354

- CR

Oliver Wesley Evans, Jr.

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 432nd District Court

o f Tarrant County (1458253D )

August 16, 2018

Opinio n by Justice Kerr

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

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

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APP EALS

By

_ /s/ Elizabeth Kerr

_________________ Justice Elizabeth Kerr
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Thomas S. Smith, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Superior Silver Mines, Inc.

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 statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.

The Registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Registrant and we have:

a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant is made known to us by others within the entity, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.

5.

The Registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of the Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date: May 12, 2010

By:    /s/ Thomas S. Smith



Thomas S. Smith, President and Director



---
Exhibit 10.8
    A.
    
    Amendment to Section 4.1(ix).Section 4.1(ix) of the Distribution Agreement is hereby
deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following provision:
   
  1




---



##### 



Amendment to Section 5.1(vii).
  Cardica, Inc.:By:
    
    /s/ Chris W. Holscher
    
    Date:
    
    January 24, 2008
 Century Medical, Inc.:By:
    
    /s/ Toshio Konishi
    
    Date:
    
    January 25, 2008
  2
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE O F 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D23- 0 488 LT Case No. 1 6 -2 015 -CF-1 0331

_____________________________ J OSHUA M. C OUNCIL , Appella nt,

v. S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee

.

_____________________________

3 .850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Adrian G. Soud, Judge. Rya n Edward McFarland, of Kent & McFarland, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Ashley M oody, Attorney General, and Virginia Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
M arch 1, 2024

H ARRIS , J.
J oshua Council was found guilty of attempted first -degree murder following the shooting of his girlfriend, Vickie Pittman. He was designated a prison releasee reoffender and sentenced to l ife in prison. Several years following his conviction, Council filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 postconviction motion raising nine grounds for relief, all sounding in ineffective2 assistance of counsel. The State was directed to file a response to three of those nine claims, and following receipt of the State’s response, the court entered an order summarily denying Council’s motion. In this appeal, Council challenged the denial of six of the nine grounds he raised. We find merit to one of Cou ncil’s arguments on appeal.
In Ground I of his motion (not one of the grounds to which the State was ordered to respond ), Council argued that his trial attorney was ineffective for failing to object to a number of improper prosecutorial comments made during closing arguments. Council then specified several of the comments to which his motion referred. The court’s order denying Council’s motion specifically addressed claims A

– H but then for reasons not entirely clear failed to address ground I in any way.
We rem and this matter to the postconviction court with instructions to rule on Ground I. If the court determines the groun d to be legally insufficient, Council should be given leave to amend that ground. Otherwise , the court shall hold an evidentiary hearing on the claims raised in Ground I or attach portions of the record conclusively showing that Council is entitled to no r elief. See Graff v. State , 922 So. 2d 1058, 1060 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (remanding for further proceedings w h ere postconviction court failed to address grounds raised in postconviction motion and did not attach portions of the record showing no entitlement to relief). In all other respects, we affirm the order denying Council’s motion.

A FFIRMED in part, R EVERSED in part, and R EMANDED

.

L AMBERT and E ISNAUGLE , JJ., concur.3 _____________________________ Not fin al until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331
.

_____________________________
EXHIBIT 32.2



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)



I, John S. Buchanan, Chief Financial Officer of Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co. (the
Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:



(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (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); and



(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: March 30, 2005 |  | /S/ JOHN S. BUCHANAN   
|                      |  | John S. Buchanan       
|                      |  | Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co. and will be retained by Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      10,920,611
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,271,065
<ALLOWANCES>                                   265,813
<INVENTORY>                                 14,167,237
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,615,969
<PP&E>                                       4,986,053
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,955,039
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              61,845,505
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,400,090
<BONDS>                                     10,618,090
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        47,259
<OTHER-SE>                                  44,981,932
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                61,845,505
<SALES>                                     26,887,897
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,666,144
<CGS>                                       14,671,898
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,671,898
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,882,356
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               119,640
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             698,509
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,111,890
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,189,166
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,922,724
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,922,724
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42


</TABLE>
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 16

- 00141

- CV
Specialty Compounding, LLC

v. Elizabeth Bourne
On Appeal from the 404th District Court of Cameron County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2014

- DCL

- 5422

- G

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having conside red this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be DISMISSED . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
2 6th day of May, 2016
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.                  

###### General Services Administration

# AGENCY:

General Services Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given of the names of the members of the Performance Review Board.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karla J. Hester, Chief of the Executive Resources Staff, Office of the Chief People Officer, General Services Administration, 1800 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20405, (202) 501-1207.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 4313(c)(1) through (5) of title 5 U.S.C. requires each agency to establish in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more Performance Review Board(s). The Board(s) shall review the performance rating of each senior executive's performance by the supervisor, along with any recommendations to the appointing authority relative to the performance of the senior executive.

Members of the Performance Review Board are:

1. Thurman M. Davis, Sr., Deputy Administrator (Chairperson)

2. William B. Early, Jr., Chief Financial Officer

3. Sandra N. Bates, Commissioner, Federal Technology Service

4. Stephenie Foster, General Counsel

5. Martha N. Johnson, Chief of Staff

6. Gail T. Lovelace, Chief People Officer

7. Robert A. Peck, Commissioner, Public Buildings Service

8. William C. Piatt, Chief Information Officer

9. Donna D. Bennett, Commissioner, Federal Supply Service

10. G. Martin Wagner, Associate Administrator for Governmentwide Policy 

Dated: October 4, 2000.

David J. Barram,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00-26189  Filed 10-11-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-BR-M