alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

ANCHOR GLASS CONTAINER CORPORATION
STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF RATIOS
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                       PERIOD FROM
                                                                     YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,         FEBRUARY 5, 1997
                                                    -----------------------------------------------          TO
                                                      2001         2000        1999         1998      DECEMBER 31, 1997
                                                    --------     --------     --------     --------   -----------------
<S>                                                 <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>        <C>
EARNINGS -

Loss before extraordinary item                      $(51,068)    $(30,981)    $(17,511)    $ (9,770)     $   (271)

Interest and amortization of debt expense             30,612       29,750       27,279       26,750        18,281

Rental expense representative of interest factor       5,133        4,333        5,088        5,915         5,849
                                                    --------     --------     --------     --------      --------

Total earnings (loss)                               $(15,323)    $  3,102     $ 14,856     $ 22,715      $ 23,859

FIXED CHARGES -

Interest and amortization of debt expense           $ 30,612     $ 29,750     $ 27,279     $ 26,570      $ 18,281

Rental expense representative of interest factor       5,133        4,333        5,088        5,915         5,849
                                                    --------     --------     --------     --------      --------

Total fixed charges                                 $ 35,745     $ 34,083     $ 32,367     $ 32,485      $ 24,130
                                                    ========     ========     ========     ========      ========


RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                        --           --           --           --            --
                                                    ========     ========     ========     ========      ========
DEFICIENCY OF EARNINGS AVAILABLE
TO COVER FIXED CHARGES                              $ 51,068     $ 30,981     $ 17,511     $  9,770      $    271
                                                    ========     ========     ========     ========      ========
</TABLE>

For the purposes of computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges and the
deficiency of earnings available to cover fixed charges, earnings consist of
income (loss) before income taxes, extraordinary items and cumulative effect of
change in accounting, plus fixed charges. Fixed charges consist of interest and
amortization of debt expense plus a portion of operating lease expense.
> 
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certification of Chief Executive OfficerPursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and Rule 13a-14(a)or 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934**

I, Ewen R. Cameron, certify that:
- I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Teltronics, Inc.;  
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate 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;
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;
- 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 have:    - 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, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  
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 periodcovered by this report based on such evaluation; and
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting; and
- The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):    - 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  
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:     August 14, 2003/s/ EWEN R. CAMERONEwen R. CameronChief Executive Officer
1 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, this Court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 1 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 23, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 02-21147

_____________________ United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus Anthony Jermaine Freeman, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas District Court No. 3:02-MC-47-G

_________________________________________________________________ Before HIGGINBOTHAM, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM. 1 The court has considered appellant’s position in light of oral argument, the briefs, and the record. Having done so, we find no reversible error. The evidence is sufficient to sustain appellant’s conviction, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding appellant’s “reverse 404(b)” evidence or in allowing the government to introduce appellant’s statements to the police. AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 23



            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-121325, 333-115970, 333-115972, 333-113322, 333-106365, 333-110672,
333-81670, 333-73764, 333-65520, 333-53142, 333-42680, 333-78239, 333-74781,
333-55761 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-91381 on Form S-3, and
Registration Statements No. 333-75069 on Form S-4 of The ServiceMaster Company
and subsidiaries of our reports dated February 28, 2005, relating to the
financial statements and financial statement schedule of The ServiceMaster
Company and subsidiaries, and management's report on the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting appearing in and incorporated by
reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The ServiceMaster Company and
subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2004.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Chicago, IL
February 28, 2005





                                        1
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 24

                             CHAPMAN HOLDINGS, INC.
                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

         KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the undersigned Directors and
Executive Officers of Chapman Holdings, Inc., incorporated in the State of
Maryland, hereby constitute and appoint Nathan A. Chapman, Jr. and Earl U.
Bravo, Sr., and either of them, the true and lawful agents and attorney-in-fact
of the undersigned with full power and authority in either said agent and
attorney-in-fact, to sign for the undersigned and in their respective names as
Directors and/or Executive Officers of Chapman Holdings, Inc., the Annual Report
on Form 10-KSB, and any and all further amendments to said report, hereby
ratifying and confirming all acts taken by such agent and attorney-in-fact, as
herein authorized.

Dated as of:  March 25, 2000





/S/ NATHAN A. CHAPMAN, JR.                       /S/ DONALD V. WATKINS
----------------------------------------------   ------------------------------
Nathan A. Chapman, Jr., President, Chairman      Donald V. Watkins, Director
of the Board and Director (Principal Executive
Officer)



/S/ EARL U. BRAVO, SR.                          /S/ LOTTIE H. SHACKELFORD
----------------------------------------------  ------------------------------
Earl U. Bravo, Sr., Director                    Lottie H. Shackelford, Director




/S/ DEMETRIS BROWN
--------------------------
Demetris Brown, Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
#### PACK et al. v. ROSS et al.

Court of Appeals' of Kentucky.

Feb. 12, 1954.

Clyde L. Miller, Louisa, for appellants.

Eldred E. Adams, W. D. Sparks, Louisa, for appellees.

MILLIKEN, Justice.

The sole question presented on this appeal is whether the chancellor properly directed the sale of 49 acres of Lawrence County land in order to effect partition between the litigants. The appellants were the owners of a one-seventh undivided interest in it and the appellees owned the remaining interest. The appellants contend that the land should .have been partitioned in kind and their one-seventh interest set aside to them. Their contention appears to be partially motivated by sentiment and partially by the fact that the appellees, as owners of a six-sevenths undivided interest, had a very practical financial advantage in bidding in the. property for ,$4,100 at the sale. ,.

Thirteen acres of bottom land were on the west or north side of Hood Creek as it meanders, while all the remaining acreage was on the east side of the creek and consisted of 8 acres of bottom land, 8 acres of sloping, cleared land, and 17 acres of steep timberland. The chancellor viewed the tract and had the benefit of co-operative counsel as well as the testi*888mony of sundry witnesses in reaching his conclusion on the issue of divisibility. While the law does favor partition in kind where feasible as contended by the appellants, Rader v. Schock, 311 Ky. 855, 226 S.W.2d 1; Purcell v. Purcell, 303 Ky. 478, 198 S.W.2d 43; Tuggle v. Davis, 292 Ky. 27, 165 S.W.2d 844, 143 A.L.R. 1087, such division is not obligatory. In the case at. bar the chancellor was unable to find such a solution because of the diverse nature of the terrain and the fractional interests of the parties, and there was substantial evidence to support him to the effect that the land could not be divided without materially affecting its value. In their private negotiations the litigants had not been able to solve the same problem. Far from being convinced the chancellor erred, we conclude instead that he acted wisely.

The judgment is affirmed.
Independent Accountant's Report
                         -------------------------------

November 2, 1998

To the Board of Directors
of Oakwood Acceptance Corporation

We have examined management's assertion about Oakwood Acceptance Corporation's
(the "Company") compliance with the minimum servicing standards identified in
the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program
for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the year ended September 30, 1998
included in the accompanying management assertion. Management is responsible for
the Company's compliance with those minimum servicing standards. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the
entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
minimum servicing standards and performing such other procedures, as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal determination on the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing
standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended
September 30, 1998 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ PRICE WATERHOUSE COOPERS LLP
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

DANA WHITE

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 2270

[ October 18, 2018 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Edward Harold

Merrigan , Judge; L.T. Case No. 09

- 21981 CF10A

.

Dana White, Avon Park , pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

M AY

, K LINGENSMITH and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FIRST QUARTER 10Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                              23
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      853
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                         35
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,187
<PP&E>                                           4,189
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,408
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,115
<BONDS>                                            989
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,707
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,408
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   689
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      613
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  13
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     79
<INCOME-TAX>                                        31
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 48
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        48
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>NOT SEPARATELY IDENTIFIED IN THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OR
ACCOMPANYING NOTES THERETO.
</FN>
        

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

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          64,277
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          31,684
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               190,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,183,147
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,666,441
<ALLOWANCE>                                     17,268
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,413,872
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,667,262
<SHORT-TERM>                                   222,326
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            229,199
<LONG-TERM>                                     73,254
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,871
<OTHER-SE>                                     201,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               3,413,872
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 31,456
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               18,743
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,403
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                51,602
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              24,587
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,554
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           22,048
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      300
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   9
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 68,910
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,543
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      11,921
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,921
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.55
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.03
<LOANS-NON>                                      8,749
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                16,693
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                       275
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               17,268
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            17,268
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         17,268
        

</TABLE>
CITICORP MORTGAGE, INC.                                        FINANCIAL CONTROL

12855 N. OUTER FORTY DRIVE
MS 822
ST. LOUIS, MO 63141


As of and for the year ended  December 31,  1997,  Citicorp  Mortgage,  Inc. (an
indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Citicorp) and subsidiaries (the Company) has
complied,  in all material  respects  with the minimum  servicing  standards set
forth  in  the  Mortgage  Bankers   Association  of  America's   UNIFORM  SINGLE
ATTESTATION FOR MORTGAGE  BANKERS.  As of and for this same period,  the Company
had in effect  fidelity bond and errors and omissions  policies in the amount of
$274 million.

Very truly yours,




CITICORP MORTGAGE, INC.


By:  /s/  David B. Lowman
              David B. Lowman, Managing Director-
              Mortgage Services

By  /s/  Jim B. Levites           3-4-98
            Jim B. Levites, Managing Director-
            Default Management

By  /s/  Richard G. Thornberry     3-9-98
             Richard G. Thornberry President/Chief Operating Officer

By /s/  Carl Levinson
           Carl L. Levinson, Chairman/Chief Executive Officer


February 20, 1998
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 201 2

- NM

- 0 24

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-23-00447-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.G., K.M. AND 

J.H., CHILDREN

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 233rd District Court

of Tarrant County (233-642555-18)

April 5, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker

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 APPEALS 

By /s/ Brian Walker

 Justice Brian Walker