alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### A. D. JONES, movant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Feb. 13, 1951.

O. H. Brooks, Mayfield, for movant.

A. E. Funk, Atty. Gen., Zab A. Stewart, Asst. Atty. Gen., opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from the Marshall 'Circuit Court. Judgment of conviction for possessing intoxicating liquor for sale in local option territory and imposing sentence of $50 fine and 30 days in jail.

Appeal denied. Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SIMCALA, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1999 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>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          17,441<F1>
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,816
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,333
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,961
<PP&E>                                          57,451
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,180
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 113,437
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,095
<BONDS>                                         81,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,807
<OTHER-SE>                                      (5,373)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   113,437
<SALES>                                         41,492
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,492
<CGS>                                           39,197
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   674
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,786
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,569)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (1,418)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3,151)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,151)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Of this amount, 6,289 was Restricted Cash
</FN>


</TABLE>
Case 1:22-cr-00040-H-BU Document 68 Filed 08/30/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 119
Case 1:22-cr-00040-H-BU Document 68 Filed 08/30/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 120
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             736
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             135
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           5,500
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               726
<LOANS>                                         88,889
<ALLOWANCE>                                        544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  99,678
<DEPOSITS>                                      67,324
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,202
<LONG-TERM>                                     17,186
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            16
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,950
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  99,678
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,873
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                   84
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    19
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,976
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 849
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,053
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              923
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       12
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    604
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    368
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         136
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       232
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.83
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,828
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   614
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       82
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  544
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               544
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-10-00236-CR

STEPHEN RUFFIN,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 52nd District Court

Coryell County, Texas

Trial Court No. FAM-05-17804

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted Stephen Ruffin of aggravated assault on a public servant in nine 

separate cause numbers. Ruffin filed a notice of appeal for eight of the convictions, but 

due to a clerical error, a notice of appeal was not filed for one conviction. The Court of 

Criminal Appeals granted Ruffin’s writ of habeas corpus allowing him to file an out of 

time appeal. Ruffin now appeals his conviction of aggravated assault on a public 

servant in trial court cause number FAM-05-17804. We reverse and remand.
Ruffin v. State Page 2

On original submission, this Court affirmed Ruffin’s eight convictions for 

aggravated assault on a peace officer. Ruffin v. State, 234 S.W.3d 224 (Tex. App.—Waco 

2007). The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed this Court’s decision and remanded the 

case for further consideration. Ruffin v. State, 270 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). 

On September 23, 2009, this Court reversed Ruffin’s eight convictions, and remanded 

the cause to the trial court.

In his sole issue on appeal, Ruffin contends that the disposition of this appeal is 

governed by the doctrine of the law of the case. On remand from the Court of Criminal 

Appeals, this Court held that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding Ruffin’s 

proferred expert testimony under TEX. R. EVID. 403. We found that the error was 

harmful, and remanded the cause for further proceedings.

The legal principle or doctrine of the law of the case provides that an appellate 

court's resolution of a question of law in a previous appeal of the same case will govern 

the disposition of the same issue should there be another appeal. Ware v. State, 736 

S.W.2d 700, 701 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987). When the facts and legal issues in a case on 

appeal are virtually identical with those in a previous appeal in which the legal issues 

were resolved then logic and reason dictate that the appeals be viewed as the same case.

Id. We agree that the law of the case governs this appeal. We sustain Ruffin’s sole issue 

on appeal.

We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the cause for further 

proceedings.
Ruffin v. State Page 3

AL SCOGGINS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Reverse and remand

Opinion delivered and filed July 13, 2011

Do not publish 

[CR 25]
APPENDIXl 
Subtllta A. Banke 

Chapter 34. lnveatrnent,, Loan•, And Deposits 

Subchapter D. Dapostta 

Includes all legislation signed by the Governor or filed without the Gowmor's signBluf9 as af June 

19, 2015 

§ 34.302. Amendment Of DapHlt Contract 

(a) A bank and its account holder may amend the deposit contract by agreement or as 

pennittad by Subsection (b) or other law. 

· (b) A bank may amend a deposit contract by mailing a written notice of the amendment to tha 

account holder, separately or as an enclosure with or part of the account holder's 

statement of account or paubook. The notice must include the text and effective date of 

the amendment. The bank Is required to deliver the notice to only one of the account 

holders of a deposit account that has more than one account holder. The effective date 

may not ba earlier than the 30th day after the date of malllng the notice unless the 

amendment: 

(1) is made to comply with a statute or rule that authorizes an earlier effective date; (2) does not reduce the interest rate on the account or otherwise adversely affect the 

account holder, or 

(3) is made for a reason relatlng to security of an account. 

{c) Except for a disclosure required tc be made under Section 34.303 or the Truth in Savings 

Act ( 12 U.S.C. Section 4301 et seq.) or other federal law, before renewal of an account a 

notice of amendment Is not required under Subsection (b) for: 

(1 ) a change in tha intsrest rate on a variable-rate account, including a money market 

or negoUeble order of withdrawal account: 

(2) a change In a tenn for a time account with a maturity of one month or lass if the 

deposit contract authorizes the change in the term; or 

APPENDIX I 
Cite n Tn. Fin. CDda I M.302 

Hlatory. km 1997, 76th Lag., ch.1008, Sac. 1, llff. Sept. 1, 1997.
#### Clarence TAYLOR, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27235.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 1, 1954.

Paul W. Anderson, Marshall, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

This is a conviction for felony theft; the punishment, four years in the penitentiary.

The sole question for review is whether the proof is sufficient to show that the property taken was of the value of $50, so as to authorize the felony conviction.

In so far as the value of stolen property was concerned, the jury was instructed to convict if the alleged stolen property was “of the value of over $50.00.”

The jury was not guided. in its determination of that question by finding the reasonable cash market value of the property or, in the absence of a cash market value, its replacement value — which, we understand, is the criterion for determining the value of property in theft cases. 41 Tex.Jur., p. 27.

Appellant made no effort to have the trial court charge upon the question of value.

In appraising the sufficiency of the evidence to support the finding that the stolen property was over the value of $50, we do so upon the basis on which that question was submitted to the jury.

Upon direct examination, the injured party testified without objection that the stolen property, consisting of two truck tires, two tubes, and two rims, was “worth at least fifty dollars and one cent actual cash market value at the time.” Upon cross-examination, he testified, “I believe the actual market price for each of the tires was $50.00.”

Upon this testimony, alone, the jury was warranted in reaching its conclusion that the stolen property exceeded $50 in value.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.
|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                              
|View History: Annual                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                        
|View History:                                                               
|                                                                            
|Louisiana Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                            
|                                                                            
|Louisiana Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 34     | 27     | 24     | 21     | 21     | 23     | 23     | 22    
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 22     | 22     | 23     | 20     | 19     | 20     | NA     | 19     | NA     | 17    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 17     | 17     | 18     | 17     | 17     | 17     | 18     | 19     | 19     | 19    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 19     | 19     | 19     | 19     | 19     | 19     | 18     | 18     | 17     | 17    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 17     | 16     | 15     | 15     | 15     |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Highwoods Realty Limited Partnership (the Operating Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Edward J. Fritsch, President and Chief Executive Officer of Highwoods Properties, Inc., general partner of the Operating Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 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 Operating Partnership.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ EDWARD J. FRITSCH                                       
|Edward J. Fritsch                                           
|President and Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner
|                                                            
|January 19, 2005
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD, 

Plaintiff,

v.

BATTLE BEAVER, LLC,

 Defendant.

Case No.: 3:22-CV-00686-X

Hon. Brantley Starr

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT

Upon the unopposed motion (the “Motion”) of Defendant Battle Beaver, LLC (the 

“Defendant”) for an order extending Defendant’s time to answer or otherwise respond to the 

Complaint for Patent Infringement (the “Complaint”), it is hereby

ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED; and it is further

ORDERED that Defendant’s response to the Complaint is due May 18, 2022.

_______________________________

Hon. Brantley Starr

Case 3:22-cv-00686-X Document 14-1 Filed 04/13/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 423
Respectfully submitted,

DATED: April 13, 2022

/s/ William T. Reid, IV

William T. Reid, IV (TX No. 00788817)

wreid@reidcollins.com

Gregory S. Schwegmann (admission pending)

gschwegmann@reidcollins.com

Jeremy H. Wells (admission pending)

jwells@rctlegal.com

REID COLLINS & TSAI LLP

1301 S Capital of Texas Hwy 

Building C, Suite 300

Austin, Texas 78746

T: 512.647.6100

F: 512.647.6129

J. Benjamin King (TX No. 24046217)

bking@reidcollins.com

REID COLLINS & TSAI LLP

1601 Elm Street, Suite 4200

Dallas, Texas 75201

T: 214.420.8902

F: 214.420.8909

Counsel for Defendant Battle Beaver, LLC

/s/ J. Brian Vanderwoude

J. Brian Vanderwoude

Texas Bar No. 24047558

vanderwoude.brian@dorsey.com

Zachary Tobolowsky

Texas Bar No. 24106512

tobolowsky.zachary@dorsey.com

DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP

300 Crescent Ct, Suite 400

Dallas, TX 75201

(214) 981-9900 Phone

(214) 981-9901 Facsimile

Case 3:22-cv-00686-X Document 14-1 Filed 04/13/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 424
Gregory S. Tamkin (pro hac vice filed)

Colo. Reg. No. 27105

DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP

1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 400

Denver, Colorado 80202

(303) 629-3400

Robert J.M. Lee (pro hac vice filed)

DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP

701 5th Ave, Suite 6100

Seattle, WA 98105

(206) 903-8800

Counsel for Plaintiff Ironburg Inventions, 

Ltd.

Case 3:22-cv-00686-X Document 14-1 Filed 04/13/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 425
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    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.                          ( print page 69033)    

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 Iniltial Review Group, Subcommittee A—Cancer Centers.                    

*Date:*                         December 7-8, 2000.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 1 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites, Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Rd., Wisconsin at Western Ave., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person:*                         David E. Maslow, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Grants Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard—Room 8054, Bethesda, MD 20892-7405, 301/496-2330.                    

(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: November 3, 2000.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 00-29139 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Corey
Henry, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-2
(the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based
on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in
all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and
their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I
have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.



By:

/s/ Corey HenryName:

Corey HenryTitle:

President and Chief Executive OfficerSantander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as
Depositor(senior officer in charge of securitization ofthe depositor)Date:

March 29, 2019