alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### RO BARDS v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO et al.

No. 12370.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Jan. 30, 1952.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 20, 1952.

Application for Writ of Error Refused April 9, 1952.

Reynolds N. Cate, San Antonio, for appellant.

Jack Davis, C. J. Matthews, and W. L. Matthews, all of San Antonio, for appellees.

NORVELL, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order refusing a temporary injunction sought by Henry A. Ro Bards against the City of San Antonio and Bart Moore Construction Company. The construction company, under a contract with the City, is engaged in straightening and clearing the channel of the San Antonio River fo'r the purpose of aiding in flood control. It was Ro Bards’ contention that the construction company had gone upon lands owned by him without his permission. The City contended that its contractor was operating upon lands within the channel and bed of the river and owned by it. An issue of title was thus presented which was not determined by the hearing preceding this appeal.

The court *below*granted a temporary restraining order, but thereafter refused the temporary injunction.

We have examined the statement of the evidence adduced upon the hearing had on the application for temporary injunction and are of the opinion that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing the temporary injunction. Repka v. American Nat. Ins. Co., 143 Tex. 542, 186 S.W.2d 977; Barton v. Tharp, Tex.Civ.App., *27*S.W.2d 885; 24 Tex.Jur. 121, 136 and 141, Injunctions, §§ 85, 96 iand 100.

The order appealed from is affirmed.
#### O. D. McGOWAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 23613.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 12, 1947.

No appearance for appellant!

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

The conviction is for the offense of passing a forged instrument. The penalty assessed is confinement in 'the state penitentiary for a period of two years.

Since perfecting his appeal, appellant has filed a written motion, duly verified, requesting the privilege of withdrawing the same.

The motion is granted and the appeal is ordered dismissed.
Case 1:22-cr-00019-P-BU Document 23 Filed 04/26/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 45
Case 1:22-cr-00019-P-BU Document 23 Filed 04/26/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 46
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            5

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                       JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                         MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                 6,327,000
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          2,330,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                             218,000
<INVENTORY>                                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       9,097,000
<PP&E>                                                 6,352,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                         1,780,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        35,781,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 10,021,000
<BONDS>                                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                  18,000
<OTHER-SE>                                            25,546,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          35,781,000
<SALES>                                                8,467,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       8,467,000
<CGS>                                                  2,500,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         19,040,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        22,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (12,722,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (12,722,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (12,722,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                (0.77)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              (0.77)


</TABLE>
#### Johnnie BUSH, Movant, v. W. B. BUSH, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Feb. 27, 1953.

E. B. Rose and Buford Short, Beattyville,, for movant.

Leebern Allen, Campion, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from the Wolfe Circuit Court. Opr examination of the record leads us to the conclusion that the money judgment for $375 should be and. it is affirmed.
**Exhibit 20**

******NEWS FROM TAYLOR DEVICES, INC.****SHAREHOLDER LETTER, WINTER 2006-2007
**THIS NEWSLETTER IS DIRECTED TO ALL SHAREHOLDERS OF TAYLOR DEVICES. WEHOPE THAT IT WILL GENERATE INTEREST IN THE COMPANY, PLUS PROVIDE CURRENTFINANCIAL AND PROJECT INFORMATION. COPIES OF THIS NEWSLETTER WILL ALSO BECIRCULATED TO SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE SHARES IN BROKERAGE ACCOUNTS.**

 

**ITEM: ANNUAL MEETING**

Our Annual Meeting of Shareholders was held on November 10, 2006. The totalnumber of outstanding shares of Taylor Devices' stock on the meeting record datewas 3,142,922. A total of 2,774,332 shares were present in person or by proxy atthe meeting, representing an excellent 88% Shareholder turnout.

All of us at Taylor Devices, Inc. thank you for your continued support.

**Results for Election of Directors and term expirationdate:**

            2,723,393Shares voted for the election of Richard G. Hill term to expire 2009.

**ITEM: FINANCIAL RESULTS**

Taylor Devices completed the second quarter of its fiscal year on November30, 2006. Comparative financial results for the first quarter, second quarterand six month periods are as follows:
 **FIRST QUARTER    (8-31-06)****F/Y 06-07**** F/Y      05-06** **SALES****$3,997,502**** $3,110,099**
 
**NET EARNINGS****$155,513****   $109,315** **SHARES OUTSTANDING**** 3,142,922**** 3,102,057** **EARNINGS PER SHARE**** 5¢**** 3¢** ******
#### ARRIAGA v. STATE.

No. 24850.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 10, 1950.

None on appeal, foi appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was charged in the County Court at Law of Travis' County by complaint and information with the offense of unlawfully operating a motor vehicle upon a public street while he was under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He plead not guilty to such charge, but was found guilty by a jury and his penalty assessed at a fine of fifty dollars, from which judgment this appeal is perfected.

Neither statement of facts nor bills of exceptions are brought forward in the record. The proceedings appear to be regular, and the judgment is affirmed.
AMENDMENT TO STOCK APPRECIATION RIGHTS AGREEMENT
                      BETWEEN APPROVED FINANCIAL CORP. AND
                      JEAN S. SCHWINDT DATED APRIL 26, 1996

      This Agreement is made this 22nd day of February,  1999 between Approved
Financial Corp. (the "Corporation") and Jean S. Schwindt ("Schwindt").

                                   WITNESSETH:

      WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a Stock Appreciation Rights
Agreement on April 26, 1996 which terminated the right to exercise on April 24,
1999; and

      WHEREAS,  the  parties  hereto  desire to extend the period to  exercise
until April 24, 2002;

      NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the foregoing premises and the terms
hereinafter set forth the parties agree as follows:

      1. Article XI of the Stock Appreciation Rights Agreement is hereby deleted
in its entirety and in lieu thereof the following is inserted:

                                       "XI

      Termination of the Stock Appreciation Right and all rights and obligations
thereunder shall terminate and may no longer be exercised after the 24th day of
April, 2002."

      2. All the other terms of the Stock Appreciation Rights Agreement shall
remain the same.

      Witness the following signatures and seals:

                                          APPROVED FINANCIAL CORP.

                                          By: _______________________________
                                          Title: ____________________________


                                          -----------------------------------
                                          Jean S. Schwindt
----

----

|   | 1. | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                        |                       |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------|
|   |                                                                        | /s/      Tammy Lynn McNabb |
|   | Tammy      Lynn McNabb,Chief Executive      OfficerApril      14, 2008 |

----
252-/5"

ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 02-14-00039-CR OFFENSE: 49.04

Barclay Edward Berdan II v. The

STYLE: state of Texas COUNTY: Tarrant

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: County Criminal Court No. 9

DATE: 01/22/15 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 1327699

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Barclay Edward Berdan II v. The

STYLE: State ofTexas

APf>Eu.Afi/r\ Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE:

JUDGE:

CCA#: lSZ^SL

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGEPC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
EXHIBIT 21 

SUBSIDIARIES OF STANADYNE HOLDINGS, INC. 

Stanadyne Automotive Holding Corp., a Delaware corporation 

Stanadyne Corporation, a Delaware corporation 

Precision Engine ProductsCorp., a Delaware corporation 

Stanadyne, SpA, an S.p.A. company incorporated in Italy 

Stanadyne Amalgamations Private Limited, a private limited company incorporated in India (fully consolidated based on the company’s 51% controlling share, while the remaining 49% is recorded as a minorityinterest) 

Stanadyne Changshu Corporation, a company incorporated in the People’s Republic of China 

SUBSIDIARIES OF STANADYNE CORPORATION 

Precision Engine Products Corp., aDelaware corporation 

Stanadyne, SpA, an S.p.A. company incorporated in Italy 

Stanadyne Amalgamations Private Limited, a private limited company incorporated in India (fully consolidated based on the company’s 51% controlling share, while the remaining 49% is recorded as a minorityinterest) 

Stanadyne Changshu Corporation, a company incorporated in the People’s Republic of China
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## December 30, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



## 137259 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices



## v SC: 137259 COA: 284929 Wayne CC: 88-010966-03-FC KEVIN LOUIS CHANDLER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 5, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).

1215 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 30, 2008

Clerk
Exhibit 11


                 Boise Cascade Office Products Corporation
                     Computation of Per Share Earnings



                                            September 30           
                                      Three              Nine
                                   Months Ended      Months Ended
                                   1996     1995     1996     1995 
                                       (expressed in thousands,
                                  except per-common-share amounts)

Income per common share          $   .19  $   .20  $   .66  $   .46
  Average shares                  62,450   61,570   62,372   61,449(1)

Primary earnings per share       $   .19  $   .20  $   .65  $   .46
  Average shares                  63,076   61,608   63,103   61,462(1)

Fully diluted earnings per share $   .19  $   .20  $   .65  $   .46
  Average shares                  63,101   61,623   63,129   61,467(1)



(1) Pro forma shares.
**Exhibit 99.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

            In connection with the quarterlyreport of PC Mall, Inc., a Delaware corporation, (formerly IdeaMall, Inc. andCreative Computers, Inc.) and its wholly owned subsidiaries (collectively, the"Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarterended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the"Report"), I, Frank Khulusi, Chief Executive Officer****of the Company,hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

                   (1)  the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and 

                   (2)  the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.  

             A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

             This Certification has notbeen, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the Securities and ExchangeCommission.
#### WHELAN et al. v. STATE et al.

No. 6665.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.

Jan. 8, 1953.

John E. Taylor, Marshall, Morton Taylor, Sinton, for appellants.

C. M. Turlington, Marshall, Shirley W. Peters, Dallas, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, the defendants below, were successful in their appeal in the above styled and numbered cause, reported in Tex.Civ.App., 252 S.W.2d 271; namely, the judgment rendered against them in the trial court was in all respects reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court.

The judgment entered in this court on October 9, 1952, decreed that appellees, the State of Texas, Harrison County and Harl-eton C.S.D. No. 18, Harrison County, Texas, pay all costs of the appeal.

 In so taxing the costs, this court was in error. Art. 7333, V.A.R.C.S. of Texas stipulates that in tax suits as here involved in this litigation, “ * * * such fees shall be taxed as costs against the land to be sold under judgment for taxes, and paid out of the proceeds of sale of same after the taxes, penalty and interest due thereon are paid, and in no case shall the State or county be liable therefor.” See Pope v. State, Tex.Civ. App., 56 S.W.2d 492. This inhibition is likewise applicable to a common school district. Republic Ins. Co. v. Highland Park Independent School District, Tex. Civ.App., 57 S.W.2d 627, 633. With respect to the costs, both in the trial court and on appeal, Art. 7333 is controlling here and is an exception to the general rule restated in Glass v. Great Southern Life Ins. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 170 S.W.2d 247, 249; namely, “ * * * where the State enters the courts as a litigant it places itself upon the same basis as any other litigant and costs may be taxed against it.” Citing Ibanez v. State, Tex.Civ.App., 123 S.W.2d 704.

To tax the costs of this appeal on appellants who have prevailed would be viola-tive of Rule 131, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, which stipulates that “The successful party to a suit shall recover of its adversary all costs incurred therein, except where otherwise provided.” Glass v. Great Southern Life Ins. Co., supra. Good cause does not exist under this record to adjudge *559the costs of this appeal against appellants under the provisions of Rule 141, T.R.C.P.

Absent any provision under our statutes or rules to tax the costs of appeal against appellants or appellee, we are without legal authority to tax same..

This being true, it follows that the mandate should issue as requested by appellees, without the payment of costs, and it is so decreed.
p.1 

OAR Box 1787 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

50) ll-C-8 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 11/4/200810:22:19 AM Sheet 50 of 147 
P.2 

+<&0 Sr l * v 

or v 

i$3S; 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 

'E--C-8 

©jgnvv^ 

May 14, 1993 

FAX NOTE 

1 ; i 

Addressees 

You are invited to participate in a meeting on applicability of new source review 

(NSR) to pollution control projects to be held May 26, 1993 from 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, at 

the Washington Duke Inn, 3001 Cameron Boulevard, Durham, NC. Please RSVP to 

either JoAnn Allman at (919)541-5591 or Larry Elmore at (919)541-5433, by noon, 

May 17, 1993. 

Observers are welcome to attend the meeting with seating available on a first 

come first served basis. If you have any questions concerning the meeting, please call 

me today at (919)541-5374, or Larry Elmore next week. 

Please make any arrangements for overnight accommodations directly with the 

Washington Duke Inn at (919)490-0999 or other hotels in the area. 

Sincerely, 

— U&i-v 

Addressees 

Dave Aldorfer 

Mark Carney 

Greg Foote 

David Hawkins 

Jim Jewett 

Henry Nickel 

John Paul 

• J<J 

Bill Lamason 

NSR Reform Project Officer 

Pat Raher 

Leslie Ritts 

Ernie Rosenberg 

Molly Ross 

Donald Theiler 

Bill Tyndall 

Ron VanMersbergen 
P.3 

bcc: John Seitz 

Lydia Wegman 

Kent Berry 

Steve Hitte 

EdLillis 

Leo Stander 

David Solomon 

Bill Lamason 

Larry Elmore 

NSR Contacts
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          13,400
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   95,869
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (13,581)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,682
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               124,112
<PP&E>                                          94,975
<DEPRECIATION>                                (43,653)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 447,541
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           71,058
<BONDS>                                        130,568
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           156
<OTHER-SE>                                     228,752
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   447,541
<SALES>                                         15,546
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               340,548
<CGS>                                           11,064
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  278,634
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (630)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,900
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,212
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 38,861
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,544
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             23,317
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    23,317
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.47


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Eric S. Yeaman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Turnstone Systems, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Turnstone Systems, Inc. A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Turnstone Systems, Inc., and will be retained by Turnstone Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Date: March 31, 2006



/s/ Eric S. YeamanEric S. YeamanChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under
the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of this Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.