alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                                         
<ARTICLE>                                 5                    
<LEGEND>                                                       
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 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>                          May-30-1998          
<PERIOD-END>                               Feb-28-1998          
<CASH>                                         112,040            
<SECURITIES>                                         0            
<RECEIVABLES>                                  298,993            
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,222             
<INVENTORY>                                    214,492             
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               686,210             
<PP&E>                                         771,720             
<DEPRECIATION>                                 385,496            
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,287,961             
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          289,114             
<BONDS>                                        150,708             
<COMMON>                                       224,272             
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0             
<PREFERRED>                                          0             
<OTHER-SE>                                     537,230             
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,287,961             
<SALES>                                              0             
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,527,890             
<CGS>                                                0             
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  909,768             
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0             
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0             
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,111             
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 59,313             
<INCOME-TAX>                                    19,573             
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             39,740            
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0             
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0             
<CHANGES>                                            0             
<NET-INCOME>                                    39,740             
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.79          
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.77             
                                                               

</TABLE>
#### Vernon PARSONS, Appellant, v. Gertrude Bryant PARSONS, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 10, 1954.

Kelly Kash, Lohris H. Stevens, Irvine, for appellant.

Shumate & Shumate, H. M. Shumate, Irvine, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal and for a cross-appeal from a judgment of the Estill Circuit Court which directs the distribution *577of the proceeds of sale from jointly owned real estate. The facts, questions raised, authorities cited, and applicable law have been carefully considered by the Court, and we find no prejudicial'error.

Appeal and cross-appeal denied. Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 35.1

Annual Servicer Compliance Certificate

pursuant to

Section 3.9 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement

and

Item 1123 of
Regulation AB





USAA AUTO OWNER TRUST 2015-1





The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of USAA
Federal Savings Bank, as servicer (in such capacity, the Servicer) under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of July 29, 2015 (as amended and supplemented, or otherwise modified and in effect from time to time, the
Sale and Servicing Agreement), by and among USAA Auto Owner Trust 2015-1, USAA Acceptance, LLC, the Servicer and U.S. Bank National Association, as Indenture Trustee, does hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016, and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement was conducted under my supervision.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout such period.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate on behalf of the Servicer this
30th day of March, 2017.



/s/ Thomas CianelliName: Thomas CianelliTitle: Senior Vice President, Treasurer
#### JOHNSON v. STATE.

No. 22227.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 28, 1942.

Stewart & Barron, of Bryan, and M. L. Bennett, of Normangee, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of murder without malice and assessed a penalty of two years in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without bills of •exception. All requested charges were given by the court and the only question for our consideration is the sufficiency of the evidence.

Joe Flores, a Mexican, lived in adultery with Ora Hunter, a negro, and had so lived for more than twenty years. Flores was the father of her daughter whom appellant had married. Some time previous to the homicide appellant and his wife had quarreled and separated. She was living at the home of Ora Hunter, her mother, with whom the deceased cohabited and it was known that he always spent the night there, though he had another house which he called his home. Because of the trouble between appellant and his wife, the general family disagreement had become known and appellant testified that he had heard frequent rumors that the deceased was threatening his life. Late in the afternoon, or early evening, appellant went on a business mission for an automobile establishment for whom he worked and returned by the way of Ora Hunter’s home. He visited with his wife, his baby, and Ora Hunter in front of the house for about an hour and until the deceased approached. He testifies that because of the rumors that deceased was going to kill him he had secured a pistol and placed it in the glove compartment of the automobile. Tt, therefore, appears that he intended to come by the house at this particular time; that he had in mind the deceased would be there, according to his custom, and that he had armed himself for the occasion. There is but slight evidence to indicate an attack upon appellant by the deceased, yet, that issue was properly submitted to the jury, which seemed to have found the facts against him. The jury found him guilty of murder without malice under a state of, facts that would amply have justified them in finding him guilty of murder with malice had they seen fit to do so.

We find no ground for complaint on the insufficiency of the evidence.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
#### Ruth Burstein et al., Appellants, v Richmond Memorial Hospital and Health Center, Respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), rendered June 5, 1989, upon a jury verdict in favor of defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the order of the same court entered on February 15, 1989, denying plaintiffs’ motion, *inter alia,*to set aside the verdict, is dismissed as subsumed with the appeal from the final judgment, without costs.

Plaintiff and his wife commenced this negligence action against defendant Richmond Memorial Hospital and Health Center for injuries purportedly received when he fell off a stretcher following surgery.

Two years prior to plaintiff’s admission for a colonoscopy, plaintiff was diagnosed as suffering from a severe debilitating neurological disease known as "Guillain-Barré syndrome” which left him temporarily paralyzed, and required that he undergo an extensive physical rehabilitation regimen. At the time of the operation, plaintiff was still suffering the effects of the disease and required the use of a wheelchair to move about. As plaintiff was being wheeled into surgery on a stretcher he noticed it was "shimmying” and "wobbling” and pointed this out to the patient aide wheeling it. During postoperative recovery, the stretcher suddenly collapsed, causing plaintiff to fall and sustain some bruises. Although plaintiff claimed his rehabilitative progress was hampered or set back by the fall, he offered no medical expert testimony on this issue.

On appeal, plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in its refusal to grant a missing witness charge as to a registered nurse to whom he may have expressed concern about the condition of the stretcher, and to the court’s granting of such a charge with respect to plaintiff’s treating neurological physician. In view of plaintiff’s own testimony that he had told a patient aide and not a nurse about the condition of the stretcher, he was not entitled to the requested missing witness *152charge. *(See, Chandler v Flynn,*111 AD2d 300, *appeal dismissed*67 NY2d 647.) Even if it was error to give a missing witness charge as to the physician who acted as a neurological consultant for plaintiffs treating physician, the error was harmless since that witness pertained only to damages and the jury verdict rested on a finding of no liability.

Expert testimony was properly admitted to demonstrate that the collapse of the stretcher was caused by a manufacturing design defect which was not readily discoverable, and was not the result of defendant’s improper inspection and maintenance. In view of this evidence, the court correctly refused to charge res ipsa loquitur doctrine. *(See, Dermatossian v New York City Tr. Auth.,*67 NY2d 219.)

We have considered plaintiffs’ remaining claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ross, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Edward Meng, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Navstar Media Holdings,
Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual 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)) for the registrant and we have:

     (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
     disclosure controls or procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
     ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
     consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
     entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
     being prepared;

     (b) 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;

     (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
     control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
     fourth 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 of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of 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: April 1, 2007

/s/ Edward Meng
---------------
Edward Meng
Chief Financial Officer



<PAGE>
1

COURT OF APPEALS 

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

EL PASO, TEXAS

GERONIMO FRANCISCO RIVERA 

A/K/A GERONIMO FRANCISCO 

RIVERA-LOZOYA,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00223-CR

Appeal from the 

171st DistrictCourt

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20150D05113)

O R D E R

The Court of Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas continues the hearing on the order to 

show cause as to why Rebecca Macias should not be held in civil and/or criminal contempt until 

December 23, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. In the interim we make the following ORDERS: 

I.

Rebecca Macias is the court reporter of record for a hearing in the appeal styled Geronimo 

Francisco Rivera a/k/a Geronimo Francisco Rivera-Lozoya v. The State of Texas, No. 08-19-

00223-CR.

The reporter’s record in this appeal is ORDERED to be completed and submitted to the 

Clerk of the Court no later than December 22, 2020.

Macias’ Continuing Duties to this Court

Rebecca Macias is ORDERED to daily monitor her email for correspondence from the 

Court and promptly respond. Rebecca Macias is ORDERED to contact the Clerk of the Court, 

Elizabeth Flores, every Monday, by telephone or email beginning December 21, 2020 as to the 
2

status of any outstanding reporter’s records due to the 8th Court of Appeals. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of December, 2020.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
# WEST VIRGINIA

SECRETARY OF STATE NATALIE E. TENNANT 

# ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DIVISION Do Not Mark In This Box

Form #6 

## OFnc[ ~-v 

## =01 \! iAGiNlA SECnETARY OF STATE



## ---- - - - ---- - --------------- -- ' - --------------

NOTICE OF FINAL FILING AND ADOPTION OF A LEGISLATIVE RULE AUTHORIZED BY THE WEST VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE AGENCY: WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING RULE: YES ~ NO_ TITLE NUMBER: 45 IF YES, SERIES NUMBER OF RULE BEING AMENDED :
__ 1_4

__ TITLE OF RULE BEING AMENDED : Permits for Construction and Major Modifications on Major Stationary Sources of Air pollution for the prevention of Significant Deterioration · IF NO , SERIES NUMBER OF RULE BEING PROPOSED :
_ TITLE OF RULE BEING PROPOSED :
_
THE ABOVE RULE HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE WEST VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE. AUTHORlZATION IS CITED IN (house or senate bill number) =S=B -=1=53=--- _ SECTION S_e_c_ti_on--><-§ .. •• . . §6_4_-_3-_I . • ... (i)<-- __ , PASSED ON -=A~p;.;; .r; . ;; .il .. ;;; . 3 . ;; . ;0,~2; . ;;.0 .. ;;; . 09:

__ _ THIS RULE IS FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE. THIS RULE BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON THE FOLLOWING DATE: June 1,2009 Randy C . Huffman, Cabinet Secretary
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

          - [Docket Nos. RP01-55-000 and RP01-37-000 (Not Consolidated)]

Take notice that on October 10, 2000, WestGas InterState, Inc. (WGI), and Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans) tendered for filing separately their petition for exemption from the imbalance trading requirements of 18 CFR 284.12(c)(2)(ii), of the Commission regulations, which requires pipelines to implement imbalance netting and trading on their systems.

WGI and Equitrans states that copies of this filing have been served on their jurisdictional customers and public bodies. 

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filings should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or before October 26, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 

David P. Boergers, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-27345 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### O’MARY v. STATE.

No. 24495.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 19, 1949.

No attorney' for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction was for selling in' Wichita County, Texas, an alcoholic beverage containing in excess of 4% 'by weight of alcohol, without first having procured a permit authorizing the sale of such liquor. The punishment assessed was by a fine of two hundred dollars.

The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception, in which condition nothing is presented for review, and the judgment is affirmed.
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.                  

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with § 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 1, the Federal Emergency Management Agency gives notice that the following meeting will be held: 

*Name:*                             Technical Mapping Advisory Council.                         

*Date of Meeting:*                             October 26-27, 2000.                         

*Place:*                             Wyndam Emerald Plaza Hotel 400 West Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101.                         

*Times:*                             8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., each day.                         

*Proposed Agenda:*

1. Call to Order and Announcements. 

2. Action on Minutes of Previous Meetings. 

3. Finalize Council's Annual and Final Reports. 

4. New Business. 

                            5. Adjournment.                                   ( print page 63590)    

*Status:*                             This meeting is open to the public.                        

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael K. Buckley, P.E., Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., room 421, Washington, DC 20472, telephone (202) 646-2756 or by facsimile at (202) 646-4596. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This meeting is open to the public with limited seating available on a first-come, first-served basis. Members of the general public who plan to attend the meeting should contact Ms. Sally P. Magee, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., room 442, Washington, DC 20472, telephone (202) 646-8242 or by facsimile at (202) 646-4596 on or before May 29, 2000. 

Minutes of the meeting will be prepared and will be available upon request 30 days after they have been approved by the next Technical Mapping Advisory Council meeting in November 2000. 

Dated: October 16, 2000. 

Margaret Lawless, 

*Deputy Associate Director for Mitigation.*

[FR Doc. 00-27211 Filed 10-23-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6718-04-P
#### HARKLEROAD v. STATE.

No. 26414.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 6, 1953.

No attorney on appeal.

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

BELCHER, Commissioner.

The appellant was convicted for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor in a wet area without a permit, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $100.

The complaint and information, as well as all matters of procedure, appear regular. The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception, in the absence of which nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.