alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BLYTHE et al. v. YATES.

No. 1576—6896.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.

Oct. 16, 1935.

Benson & Benson, of Bowie, and H. E. Lobdell, of Decatur, for plaintiffs in error.

C. T. Gettys and H. G. Woodruff, both of Decatur, for defendant in error.

RYAN, Commissioner.

Prior to April 20, 1934, E. W. Blythe and L. V. Yates owned certain picture show equipment used in the Majestic Theatre, located in Decatur, Tex. On that date Blythe purchased from Yates that portion of the equipment owned by the *220latter, under written contract, the last clause of which reads as follows: “The said Yates hereby binds himself to not directly or indirectly engage in the show or theatre business in Decatur, Texas, for a period of ten years from this date, as affects said Blythe or his estate.”

About October 1, 1934, after Blythe’s death and after Mrs. Jewell Blythe had qualified as survivor in community of the estate of herself and her deceased husband, she leased the equipment in question to P. S. Stallings, who immediately took charge of its operation. The lease contract was for a term of twelve months with option to continue the lease for an additional twelve months.

About the date last above mentioned, L. V. Yates began the erection and equipment of a moving picture show or theater in the town of Decatur, whereupon Mrs. Jewell Blythe (individually and as such community survivor), and P. S. Stallings filed their petition in the district court of Wise county, seeking to enjoin Yates from erecting and operating such a show and for damages in connection therewith.

After full hearing, the trial judge granted a temporary injunction restraining Yates from operating his picture show, which order was reversed, and the temporary injunction dissolved by the Court of Civil Appeals. 79 S.W.(2d) 913.

Writ of error was granted by the Su- - preme Court.

It is now made to appear that since the granting of the writ of error the property in question has been conveyed by Mrs. Jewell Blythe for herself and as community survivor of E. W. Blythe, deceased, to the Wade-Tex Theatre of Gainesville, Tex., and that Stallings, the tenant and co-plaintiff with her herein, has surrendered possession to said vendee, who is now in full control and operation thereof; Mrs. Blythe and Stallings have, therefore, no further concern or interest therein.

The subject-matter of this litigation having become moot, the cause is dismissed at the cost of plaintiffs in error. Thompson & Co. v. City of San Antonio (Tex. Com. App.) 44 S.W.(2d) 972; Thompson & Co. v. City of San Antonio (Tex. Com. App.) 38 S.W.(2d) 784; Bell v. Lucas (Tex. Civ. App.) 34 S.W.(2d) 356.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00404-CV

Norte Holdings, LLC

v.

Desarrollo Inmobiliario Las Haciendas, S.A. de C.V. and Florencio Ignacio Guerra 

Portilla a/k/a Florencio Guerra

On Appeal from the

430th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. C-2032-21-J

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

March 9, 2023
Exhibit 10.39



 Exhibit 10.39 
 Summary of Translation of the 
 Sales Contract, by and between the West Site Department of Bazhou,
Zhongyuan 
 Petroleum Exploration Bureau Project Construction Corporation (“BUYER”) and Jining 
 ENI Energy Technology Co., Ltd. (“SELLER”) 
 On May 14, 2008, the Seller executed a Sales Contract with the Buyer whereby the Seller agreed to sell and the Buyer agreed to buy a quantity of valves for the price of RMB 1,577,842.50. The Seller delivered the
valves in two installments, first on July 12, 2008 and second on August 10, 2008. The Seller has received payment in the amount of RMB 300,000, leaving an outstanding balance of RMB 1,277,842.50.
SERVED JANUARY 4, 2010 '^^' ^^IfPpBWlO? 

• i 1 f~' 

-'••i^ - "^f r 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

PRIMARIS AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. CP09WP0004 

(Civil Penalty Case) 

DMS No. FAA-2009-0186 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On March 13, 2009, the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter referred to 

as "Complainant") filed a Complaint. On February 15, 2009, Respondent Primaris 

Airlines, Inc. (hereinafter "Respondent") had requested a hearing. On December 29, 

2009, Respondent withdrew its Request for Hearing, citing settlement. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the withdrawal of Request for Hearing having been read and 

considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing be and is hereby 

granted; and 
2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

SO ORDERED. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09WP0004 

Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Gary A. Reese, Esq., Agent for Service 

Primaris Airlines, Inc. 

11412 Vale Road 

Oakton,VA 22124-1334 

TEL: 703-860-3374 

Lisa J. Toscano, Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AWP-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Western-Pacific Region 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: 310-725-7110 

FAX: 310-725-6816 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 

2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         739,140
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  991,544
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,039,850
<PP&E>                                       2,715,604
<DEPRECIATION>                                 482,179
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,723,535
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,219,431
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    760,260
<COMMON>                                        57,311
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,218,933
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,723,535
<SALES>                                      7,035,202
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,044,015
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,791,287
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             488,408
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,764,320
<INCOME-TAX>                                   940,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,824,320
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,824,320
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.30
        

</TABLE>
Appendix 7 Acute Impacts Refined Analysis FiguresRefined Acute Modeling Approach

Initial acute screening risk calculation s were performed with the HEM-3 model. HEM-3 estimates acute (1-hour) impacts at both polar and census block receptors. It is assumed for this short period of time that an exposed individual coul d be located at any off-site location. The lack of readily av ailable detailed property boundary information for many of the facilities evaluated made it difficult to determine whether receptors were

on- or off-site. In the absence of such info rmation, the first ring of polar receptors was placed 100 meters from the plant center for ma ny facilities. However, these polar rings

often transected on-site locati ons, restricting public access to exposures at these levels and thereby overestimating exposures.

The screening approach used by HEM-3 to estimate maximum 1-hour exposures also likely overestimates. To estimate ma ximum 1-hour concentrati ons at each receptor,

HEM-3 sums the maximum concentrations at tributed to each source, regardless of

whether those maximum concentrations occurr ed during the same hour. In other words, HEM-3 assumes that the maximum impact from each source at each receptor occurs at the same time. In actuality, maximum imp acts from different sources may occur at

different times.

This appendix includes the results of refined acute assessments performed for

facilities that exceeded short-term health benchmarks using the HEM-3 approach. The

refinements can address both areas of cons ervatism described above. The simplest refinement is to plot the HE M-3 polar grid results on aerial photographs of the facilities;

This allows the assessment of off-site loca tions that may be accessible to the public ( e.g., roadways and public buildings.). In cases wh ere this refinement results in lower acute

risks no further refinement was conducted. Howeve r, if acute risk sti ll remain at or near

levels of concern a further refinement is conducted. This second refinement includes remodeling with the AERMOD model directly (instead of using HEM) to estimate maximum 1-hour concentrations at each recepto r by pairing individual source impacts in time and space. The AERMOD results are then plotted on aerial photographs as noted above to determine off-site impacts. Modeling with AERMOD also allows the estimation of the frequency of higher impacts at or above the health levels of concern. The attached figures present the estimated hazard quotient values (the modeled 1-hour concentration of a pollutant divided by its sh ort-term health benchmark) at the polar receptors near the facilities. Each set of figures is pref aced with a description of the maximum off-site hazard quotient va lue and where that value occurs.Marine Tank Vessel LoadingOperations• Figure 1 - NEI7687 ; maximum offsiteacute HQ for glycol ethers of 0.6 to theeast of facility• Figure 2 - NEITX20191; maximum offsiteacute HQ for benzene of 0.96 to the southof facility in the waterwayFigure 1 – NEI7687 Acute Glycol Ethers HQ (REL)Figure 2 – NEITX20191 Acute Benzene HQ (REL)
Exhibit 23.1
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-105382, 333-146017 and 333-162734) and the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-137575) of Lifetime Brands, Inc. of our reports dated March 17, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Lifetime Brands, Inc., and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Lifetime Brands, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2009.
 
 /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
 
 Jericho, New York
 March 17, 2010
P.1 

OAR Box 1147 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

223) IV-E-97 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:59 PM Sheet 223 of 242 
A-&7-M 

P.2 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

DEC 2 3 \99\ 

OFFICE OF 

GENE RAL COUNSEL 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Memorandum to Docket re December 10, 1991 Meeting 

Concerning Onboard Refueling Rulemaking 

FROM: John Hannon, Attorney 

Air Division 

TO: Air Docket No. A-87-11 

jM^l^^y) 

On December 10, 1991 a meeting was held with persons 

representing the following interested parties, at their request: 

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, Ford Motor Company, and 

Chrysler Motor Company. Representing the Agency at this meeting 

were Raymond Ludwiszewski, Acting General Counsel, Alan Eckert, 

Associate General Counsel, John Hannon, attorney, and Michael 

Horowitz, attorney. 

i 

The representatives from the motor vehicle industry 

explained and discussed their position, as expressed in their 

comments, on the proper legal interpretation of sections 

202(a)(6) and 202(a)(4) of the Clean Air Act with respect to the 

issue of safety of onboard refueling controls. 

Primed on Recycled Paper
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-2005

CHARLES STEVEN MCLEAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CALDWELL COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; CALDWELL

COUNTY SHERIFF’S TELECOMMUNICATIONS; DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, of the State of North

Carolina,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CA-99-72-5-V)

Submitted: September 30, 1999 Decided: October 6, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Steven McLean, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
1 Because the record reveals that McLean is not a prisoner,

the district court’s dismissal is more properly made under 28

U.S.C.A. S 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (West Supp. 1999).

2 The order from which McLean appeals was filed on June 30,

1999, and entered on the district court’s docket on July 6, 1999,

in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and 79(a). See Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Steven McLean appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action for failure to state a claim under 28

U.S.C.A. S 1915A(b)(1) (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the

record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning1 of

the district court. See McLean v. Caldwell County Sheriff’s Dep’t,

No. CA-99-72-5-V (W.D.N.C. July 6, 1999).2 We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2366 

To provide an adjustment to the discretionary spending limits for 

appropriations for the 2020 decennial census. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 5, 2018 

Mr. BOOKER (for himself and Mr. SCHATZ) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To provide an adjustment to the discretionary spending 

limits for appropriations for the 2020 decennial census. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Census Funding Cap 

5 Adjustment Act of 2018’’. 

6 SEC. 2. BUDGET CAP EXEMPTION FOR CENSUS FUNDING. 

7 Section 251(b)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emer8 gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)) 

9 is amended by adding at the end the following: 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2366 IS

1 ‘‘(E) DECENNIAL CENSUS DURING 2020.— 

2 If a bill or joint resolution making appropria3 tions for a fiscal year is enacted that specifies 

4 an amount of new budget authority for the de5 cennial census to be conducted during 2020, 

6 then the adjustment for that fiscal year shall be 

7 the amount by which the new budget authority 

8 provided in that Act for that purpose exceeds 

9 $70,000,000.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2423 

To reinstate Federal Pell Grant eligibility for individuals incarcerated in 

Federal and State penal institutions, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2018 

Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. 

WHITEHOUSE, Mr. BENNET, Mr. COONS, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Ms. 

HIRONO, Ms. WARREN, Mr. BOOKER, Ms. HARRIS, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. 

MERKLEY, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, and Mr. MARKEY) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To reinstate Federal Pell Grant eligibility for individuals 

incarcerated in Federal and State penal institutions, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Restoring Education 

5 And Learning Act of 2018’’ or the ‘‘REAL Act of 2018’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2423 IS

1 SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT OF FEDERAL PELL GRANT ELIGI2 BILITY. 

3 Section 401(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 

4 (20 U.S.C. 1070a(b)) is amended— 

5 (1) by striking paragraph (6); 

6 (2) by redesignating paragraph (7) as para7 graph (6); and 

8 (3) in paragraph (2)(A)(ii), by striking 

9 ‘‘(7)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘(6)(B)’’. 

10 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

11 The amendments made by section 2 shall be effective 

12 for academic year 2018–2019 and succeeding academic 

13 years. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1
This Form 10-Q/A is filed to incorporate the cover page inadvertently omitted
by the third party engaged by IMC Mortgage Company to transmit the Report on 
Form 10-Q.


                         SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 10-Q/A



  X      Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Act
-----    of 1934 for the quarterly period ended September 30, 1998.

         Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
-----    Exchange Act of 1934.


                          Commission file No. 333-3954



                              IMC MORTGAGE COMPANY
               (Exact name of issuer as specified in its Charter)



                 Florida                             59-3350574
          (State or other jurisdiction of         (I.R.S. Employer
           incorporation or organization)      identification number)

                              5901 E. FOWLER AVENUE
                              TAMPA, FLORIDA 33617
                    (Address of Principal Executive Offices)

         Issuer's telephone number, including area code: (813) 984-8801


Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section
13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing for the past 90 days.    Yes   X    No

State the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common
equity, as of the latest practicable date:

Title of each Class:                            Outstanding at November  9, 1998
Common Stock, par value $.01 per share          33,907,948
<PAGE>   2
SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



Date:    November 17, 1998        IMC MORTGAGE COMPANY




         By:  /s/ Thomas G. Middleton


         Thomas G. Middleton, President, Chief Operating Officer, Assistant
         Secretary and Director









         By:  /s/ Stuart D. Marvin


         Stuart D. Marvin, Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                       1,644,023
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  718,067
<ALLOWANCES>                                    23,942
<INVENTORY>                                  1,505,362
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,042,100
<PP&E>                                         392,968
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,644,818
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,822,277
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           422
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,822,119
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,644,818
<SALES>                                        784,513
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               806,150
<CGS>                                          604,660
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,271,475
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,069,985)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,069,985)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.23)
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Braun, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered October 22, 1987, convicting him of arson in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The minutes of the defendant’s plea and sentence refute his contention that he entered into the plea agreement upon the misleading or erroneous advice of his assigned counsel. The record shows that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered with the effective assistance of counsel and there is no suggestion that it was improvident or baseless *(see, People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9).

Furthermore, because the defendant received the sentence that had been promised, he will not now be heard to complain that the sentence was excessive *(see, People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.