alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### J. M. RADFORD GROCERY CO. v. ESTELLINE STATE BANK*.*

No. 4382.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Amarillo.

Oct. 1, 1934.

See, also, 66 S.W.(2d) 1110.

W. E. Lessing, of Abilene, for appellant. .

Hamilton & Fitzgerald, of Memphis, for ap-pellee.

MARTIN, Justice.

On May 8, 1934, the district court of Hall county, at the instance of and upon the petition of appellant, ordered the issuance of an injunction against “The Estelline State Bank of Estelline, Texas, a corporation, its agents and employees, restraining them from securing an execution out of the County Court of Hall County, Texas, in cause No. 919, -styled Estelline State Bank vs. J. M. Radford Grocery Company, and from in any manner attempting to collect the amount of said judgment from said defendants,” etc. Thereafter, on June 22, 1934, the said district court sustained an exception of appellee to appellant’s said petition questioning its jurisdiction to make the aforesaid order, and dissolved said injunction, from which order appellant has appealed.

The purpose apparently of appellant in obtaining said injunction was to secure an offset against any judgment that might be rendered against it in a case pending in Hall county, of which the instant proceeding is only a part. It is not pretended that the said county court judgment was void. No facts appear which render inapplicable the specific terms of article 4656, R. S., 1925, reading as follows: “Writs of injunction granted' to stay proceedings in a suit, or execution on a judgment, shall be returnable to and tried in the court where such suit is pending, or such judgment was rendered; writs of injunction for other causes, if the party against whom it is granted be an inhabitant of the State, shall be returnable to and tried in the district or county court of the county in which such party has his domicile, according as the amount or matter in controversy comes within the jurisdiction of either of said courts. If there be more than one party against whom a writ is granted, it may he returned and tried in the proper court of the county where either may have his domicile.”

The entire proceeding in the district court of Hall county respecting this matter is void. It had no jurisdiction. Murph v. Bass (Tex. Civ. App.) 276 S. W. 767; Friedrich v. Brand (Tex. Civ. App.) 28 S.W.(2d) 279, 282; Switzer v. Smith (Tex. Com. App.) 300 S. W. 31, 32, 68 A. L. R. 377; Smith v. Morgan, 28 Tex. Civ. App. 245, 67 S. W. 919; Hammack v. Schley (Tex. Civ. App.) 186 S. W. 872.

The jurisdiction of the district court to enjoin the issuance of an execution on an admittedly valid judgment of the county court is the only question necessary to pass on. It is not an open one.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit
      10.1


    PROMISSORY
      NOTE

     

    FOR
      VALUE
      RECEIVED, Tailwind Financial Inc. (the
      “Payor”)
      hereby
      acknowledges itself indebted and promises to pay to or to the order of Parkwood
      Holdings Ltd. (the
      “Payee”),
      the
      principal sum of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) (the
      “Principal Amount”),
      in
      lawful currency of the United States in accordance with the terms of this
      promissory note (the
      “Note”).

     

    I. TERM

     

    Subject
      to the provisions set out below, the undersigned shall repay the Principal
      Amount to the Payee on demand.

     

    II. INTEREST

     

    No
      interest shall accrue or be payable upon the Principal Amount.

     

    III. PLACE
      OF PAYMENT

     

    All
      payments made under this Note shall be paid by the Payor as directed in writing
      by the Payee.

     

    IV. ASSIGNMENT

     

    The
      Payor
      shall not be permitted to assign this Note, in whole or in part, without the
      prior written consent of the Payee.

     

    V. GOVERNING
      LAW

     

    This
      Note
      shall be construed, interpreted and enforced in accordance with, and the
      respective rights and obligations of the parties shall be governed by, the
      laws
      of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable herein.

     

    VI. SUCCESSORS
      AND ASSIGNS

     

    This
      Note
      shall be binding upon the successors and permitted assigns of the
      Payor.

     

    DATED
      AT
      TORONTO,
      this
      25th
      day of
      September, 2008.

     

    
      	 	 	 
	 	TAILWIND
              FINANCIAL, INC.
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	Per: 	/s/ Andrew
              A.
              McKay
	 	
              Andrew
                A. McKay

              Chief
                Executive Officer

            


    

     

    
      	 	 	 
	 	PARKWOOD HOLDINGS
              LTD.
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	Per: 	/s/ Andrew
              A.
              McKay
	 	
              Andrew
                A. McKay

              President
----

| 1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of GCI, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2008; |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  Date: October 12, 2009 |   /s/ John M. Lowber |
|------------------------------|---------------------------|
|                         | John M. Lowber            |
|                         | Chief Financial Officer   |

----
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
                           ASPECT DEVELOPMENT, INC.
                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
               (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA; UNAUDITED)

                                                          Three months ended
                                                            March 31, 1997
                                                       ---------       ---------
                                                         1997            1996
                                                       ---------       ---------

Common Stock:
      Weighted average common stock
       outstanding during the period                      12,355           5,411

Common Stock Equivalents:
      Net effect of dilutive options
      based upon modified treasury stock method            1,593             932

Convertible preferred stock                                                3,687

Stock related to SAB No. 64 and 83                                           822
                                                       ---------       ---------
Shares used in per share computations                     13,948          10,852
                                                       =========       =========
Net income                                             $     924             188
                                                       =========       =========

Net income per share
                                                       $    0.07            0.02
                                                       =========       =========
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6015
IRA WAYNE MADISON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-1232-7) Submitted: February 20, 2003 Decided: February 28, 2003 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ira Wayne Madison, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Ira Wayne Madison appeals from the district court orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Madison v. Virginia , No. CA-02-1232-7 (W.D. Va. Nov. 27 & Dec. 17, 2002). On appeal, Madison asserts that the district court misconstrued a portion of his complaint. We find that his claims—even as clarified—were subject to dismissal. See Dist. of Columbia Ct. of App. v. Feldman , 460 U.S. 462, 482-86 (1983); see alsoMcMahan v. International Ass’n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers , 964 F.2d 1462, 1467 (4th Cir. 1992) (holding that appellate courts may “affirm a judgment for any reason appearing on the record”). 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
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, June 03, 2015. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, June 03, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A15I0199. PENN MILLERS INSURANCE COMPANY v. DONNA MERCER. Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 2013CV15
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-41180

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN CARLOS COVARRUBIAS-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:11-CR-331-1

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Carlos

Covarrubias-Garcia has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v.

Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Covarrubias-Garcia has not filed a

response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 19, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the 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.

Case: 11-41180 Document: 00511891469 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/19/2012
No. 11-41180

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 11-41180 Document: 00511891469 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/19/2012
<PAGE>
                                                       EXHIBIT 10.15


                           FRANKLIN BUILDING ACCOUNT
                               4818 Davis Street
                               Skokie, IL 60076



January 30, 1997


                        ADDENDUM TO ALL AMERICAN LEASE


This is an additional agreement between All American, subsidiary of Riddell
Sports, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Trust #298, concerning the extension
of All American's lease from July 1, 1997 to June 30, 2000. All conditions and
agreements from the prior lease will remain the same except for the following
agreed changes.

1.   Current rent will be increased starting July 1, 1997 to $6,592.71 per
     month, or $79,112.51 for twelve months.

2.   This is a 3-year lease.

3.   On renewal, a 5-year option with a 10% increase.

4.   The tax base will be calculated from the 1995 base year.

With the signing of this addendum by both parties incorporating the agreed
upon additions and otherwise maintaining the original July 1, 1986 to June 30,
1997 agreement. This is our complete lease and agreement with All American.

Lessee:                                 Lessor:

All American                            Paul Goldstein
Subsidiary of Riddell Sports, Inc.      Sole Beneficiary of Trust #5298
A Delaware Corporation


By:   WILLIAM D. LOGAN                  By:  PAUL GOLDSTEIN
    ---------------------------             -------------------------
     William D. Logan                        Paul Goldstein
     Vice President - Finance

Date Signed: _________________                    Date Signed: ______________
<page>			            EXHIBIT 32.01



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Spectrum
Select L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Jeffrey A.
Rothman, President, Demeter Management Corporation, the general
partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(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 Partnership.





By:	  /s/	Jeffrey A. Rothman

Name:		Jeffrey A. Rothman
Title:	President

Date:		March 31, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       5
<CIK>                           0001013148
<NAME>                          Xybernaut Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000
       
  <S>                         <C>
  <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 Dec-31-1998
  <PERIOD-START>                    Apr-01-1998
  <PERIOD-END>                      Jun-30-1998
  <PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
  <CASH>                             4,014,723
  <SECURITIES>                               0
  <RECEIVABLES>                        204,876
  <ALLOWANCES>                          22,513
  <INVENTORY>                        1,172,699
  <CURRENT-ASSETS>                   5,769,668
  <PP&E>                             1,173,511
  <DEPRECIATION>                       399,723
  <TOTAL-ASSETS>                     7,433,903
  <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              1,277,405
  <BONDS>                                    0
  <COMMON>                             209,348
  <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
  <PREFERRED>                          364,754
  <OTHER-SE>                         5,582,396
  <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       7,433,903
  <SALES>                              229,634
  <TOTAL-REVENUES>                     231,473
  <CGS>                                271,905
  <TOTAL-COSTS>                        271,905
  <OTHER-EXPENSES>                   2,265,654
  <LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
  <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0
  <INCOME-PRETAX>                   (2,303,184)
  <INCOME-TAX>                               0
  <INCOME-CONTINUING>               (2,303,184)
  <DISCONTINUED>                             0
  <EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
  <CHANGES>                                  0
  <NET-INCOME>                      (2,303,184)
  <EPS-PRIMARY>                           (.13)
  <EPS-DILUTED>                           (.13)
        

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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>


<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,144,827
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      265,513
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,527,156
<PP&E>                                             191,543
<DEPRECIATION>                                      10,138
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,262,854
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,216,715
<BONDS>                                            437,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               23,947
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             5,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,579,692
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,262,854
<SALES>                                            754,167
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   754,167
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,624,990
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,870,823)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,870,823)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,870,823)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.08)



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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          12,423
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,396
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,155
<INVENTORY>                                     15,247
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,330
<PP&E>                                          14,210
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,436
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  49,165
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,383
<BONDS>                                         37,127
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,666
<COMMON>                                        57,349
<OTHER-SE>                                     (65,101)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    49,165
<SALES>                                         17,276
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,276
<CGS>                                           17,579
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,579
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,845
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,274
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (26,878)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        17
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (26,895)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (26,895)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.98
        

</TABLE>
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2451 

To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to consider State 

analysis and sharing of prescription drug monitoring program data in 

determining prescription drug monitoring program grants to States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2018 

Mr. CASSIDY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services 

to consider State analysis and sharing of prescription 

drug monitoring program data in determining prescription drug monitoring program grants to States. 

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 ‘‘Protection from Over5 prescribing Act’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2451 IS

1 SEC. 2. CONSIDERATION IN AWARDING GRANTS TO SUP2 PORT STATE PDMPS. 

3 In determining whether to award a grant to a State 

4 in support of a State prescription drug monitoring pro5 gram, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 

6 consider whether each agency of the State that admin7 isters the prescription drug monitoring program proac8 tively analyzes data available through the State’s prescrip9 tion drug monitoring program and provides reports to law 

10 enforcement agencies, prescriber licensing boards, and 

11 other agencies describing any prescribers that repeatedly 

12 fall outside of expected norms or standard practices for 

13 the prescriber’s field. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 15, 2018

No. 04-18-00731-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.E. AND G.K.R., CHILDREN,

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17-0827-CV

Honorable Thomas Nathaniel Stuckey, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal of the trial court’s order terminating the appellant’s parental 

rights. The appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed on November 13, 2018.

On November 11, 2018, appellant filed a motion seeking an order compelling the court 

reporter to file a supplemental reporter’s record containing the exhibits introduced at trial and 

requesting an extension of time to file the brief. On November 13, 2018, the court reporter filed 

a corrected exhibit volume to the reporter’s record containing the exhibits.

Appellant’s motion seeking an order to compel the filing of a supplemental reporter’s 

record is MOOT. Appellant’s request for an extension of time to file the appellant’s brief is 

GRANTED. Appellant’s brief must be filed no later than November 26, 2018. FURTHER 

REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME ARE DISFAVORED.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 15th day of November, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court