alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
SEC form 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                              45
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      331
<ALLOWANCES>                                        17
<INVENTORY>                                        340
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   958
<PP&E>                                           3,341
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,819
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,913
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,121
<BONDS>                                            818
<COMMON>                                           606
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      (1,090)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,913
<SALES>                                          3,832
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,832
<CGS>                                            2,834
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,834
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (1)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  77
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (581)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (288)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (284)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (284)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (5.54)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (5.54)<F2>
<FN>
<F1> Represents basic earnings per share as defined in FASB Statement No. 128.
<F2> Represents diluted earnings per share as defined in FASB Statement No. 128.
</FN>

        


</TABLE>
#### LOVE v. STATE.

No. 15376.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 9, 1932.

Williford & Williford, of Fairfield, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*349LATTIMORE, J.

Conviction for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

The motion for new trial was overruled January 27, 1932, and notice of appeal then given. The appellant was allowed seventy days in which to file statement of facts and bills of exception. Appellant has two bills of exception. Both were filed April 23, 1932. Manifestly this is beyond the seventy days granted by order of the court. On April 4, 1932, the court made an order extending the time for filing the statement of facts, but no mention is therein made of the bills of exception.

Appellant complains on appeal of the lack of sufficient- testimony corroborating that of an accomplice. Said accomplice testified that he was at a still on the 13th of July, 1931, when appellant was there. He said appellant was there when he got there. We quote: “He was there making whisky when I first got there, but he was not there when the laws came.” This witness said he went down to the still about 5 o’clock in the afternoon; that there were barrels of hops at the place; a fire was under the still and whisky was there. He said he saw appellant pour up something into a jar, and he saw him pouring whatever this was into a barrel. He further testified that appellant left the still fifteen of twenty minutes before the officers got there. This was the testimony of the accomplice.

Three officers raided the still on the night of July 13th and found a quantity of whisky, mash, etc., and a still in operation, having fire under it and whisky running out of the coil. One of these officers was Bob Reeves. Reeves testified that he was with the other officers who made the raid, and as to what they found. He also testified that on that saíne afternoon approximately two and a half hours before the raid, he was near said still and saw appellant there. We quote: “He was firing up his pot. He had built a fire and was getting ready to work. I suppose I watched him anywhere from three to five minutes, and, according to my best judgment, I would say I was about forty steps from him and the still. 3⁄8 ‘ 3⁄8 * He is the only one I saw there at that time, and he had built a fire under the still; I saw him building it. He had the fire going and was around the still. I say I saw him build this fire. * * * He was standing up, moving around as you would do in performing any other duties.” It seems hardly necessary to indulge in a discussion of the fact that this testimony was corroborative of that given by the accomplice. The officer testified that he saw appellant engaged in the preliminary operations incident to and necessary in the manufacture of intoxicating liquor and apparently in charge of said still. The accomplice testified that he saw appellant later on the same afternoon engaged in the actual manufacture of intoxicating liquor at said place with said still.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.

HAWKINS, J., not sitting.
#### Goss, Appellant, *v.*Spencer.

*Real property*— Ejectment—Tenancy *by the curtesy*— Forfeiture *—Conflicting evidence*— Case *for jury.*

In an action of ejectment to recover land in possession of the husband of the former owner, where defendant claimed that he had elected to take the real estate as tenant by the curtesy and'was so holding it, and plaintiff contended and offered evidence to prove that defendant had forfeited his estate by the curtesy by claiming title to the land in fee and that he had elected to take against the will of his wife, and was therefore entitled to but a life interest in one-third of the real estate which had been devised to plaintiff in fee, the. case was properly submitted to the jury and a judgment on a verdict for defendant was sustained.

Argued March 15, 1916.

Appeal, No. 369, Jan. T., 1916, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. ,P. Bradford Co., Sept. T., 1914, No. 279, on verdict for defendant, in case of Helen L. Goss v. Nelson D. Spencer.

Before Mestrezat, Potter, Stewart, Mosohzisker .and Frazer, JJ.

Affirmed.

Ejectment to recover the possession of certain real estate left by decedent. Before Albert W. Johnson, P. J., specially presiding.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Verdict for defendant and judgment thereon. Plaintiff appealed.

*Errors assigned,*among others, were in refusing to direct a verdict for plaintiff and in refusing to enter judgment for plaintiff, n. o. v.

*364
      *Wm. P. Wilson,*with him *J. Roy*Lilley> for appellant.

*J. C. Ingham,,*with him *Charles M. Culver,*for appellee.

April 17, 1916 :

Per Curiam,

Jennie B. Spencer died testate seized in fee of the real estate in question which she devised to her daughter, Helen L. Goss, 'the plaintiff in this action of ejectment. The defendant was the husband of Jennie B. Spencer, and claims that he elected to take the real estate as tenant by the curtesy and is so holding it. The plaintiff contends that the defendant forfeited his estate by the curtesy by claiming title to the land in fee, and further that he elected to take against the will of his wife the one-third of the personal estate absolutely and a life interest in the one-third of her real estate. These were questions of fact, and having been properly submitted to the jury under competent evidence in a charge to which error is not assigned, the verdict for the defendant establishes his right to the possession of the premises, and, therefore, the judgment is affirmed.
### UNITED STATES NAVY

- MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Before

J. R. MCFARLANE, K.J. BRUBAKER , J.P. LISIECKI

Appellate Military Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

JUAN LEON , JR.

AVIATION ELECTRICIAN'S MATE SECOND CLASS (E

- 5 ), U.S. NAVY

NMCCA 201400372

GENERAL COURT

- MARTIAL

**Sentence Adjudged:** 13 June 2014

. **Military Judge:** CAPT A.H. Henderson, JAGC, USN

. **Convening Authority:** Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station,

Lemoore, CA

. **Staff Judge Advocate's Recommendation:** LT D.A. Christenson,

JAGC, USN

. **For Appellant:** Maj John Stephens, USMC.

**For Appellee:** Mr. Brian K. Keller , Esq

.

**2 6**  **February 2015**

**---------------------------------------------------**

**OPINION OF THE COURT**

**---------------------------------------------------**

After careful consideration of the record, submitted

without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence

as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform

Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL

Clerk of Court
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7207

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

KEVIN FORDE, a/k/a Miami Kev,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (4:11-cr-00089-MSD-DEM-3; 4:14-cv-00143-MSD)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit 

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

S. W. Dawson, Norfolk, Virginia for Appellant. Eric Matthew 

Hurt, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kevin Forde seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order 

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Forde has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT (24)(A)



February 22, 2002

Mr. Alan M. Wright and
Mr. Rodger A. Kershner
CMS Energy Corporation
Fairlane Plaza South, Suite 1100
330 Town Center Drive
Dearborn, MI 48126

CMS Energy Corporation is required to file an Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2001 with the Securities and Exchange Commission within
90 days after the end of the year.

We hereby make, constitute and appoint each of you our true and lawful attorney
for each of us and in each of our names, places and steads to sign and cause to
be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission said Annual Report with any
necessary exhibits, and any amendments thereto that may be required.

Very truly yours,


<TABLE>
<S>                                                                    <C>
      /s/ WILLIAM T. MCCORMICK, JR.                                                         /s/ DAVID W. JOOS
-----------------------------------------------------                  ----------------------------------------------------
               William T. McCormick, Jr.                                                    David W. Joos



                     /s/ J. M. DEUTCH                                                         /s/ W. U. PARFET
-----------------------------------------------------                  ----------------------------------------------------
                    John M. Deutch                                                        William U. Parfet



             /s/ JAMES J. DUDERSTADT                                                       /s/ PERCY A. PIERRE
-----------------------------------------------------                  ----------------------------------------------------
                  James J. Duderstadt                                                      Percy A. Pierre



          /s/ KATHLEEN R. FLAHERTY                                                               /s/ K. L. WAY
-----------------------------------------------------                  ----------------------------------------------------
                 Kathleen R. Flaherty                                                      Kenneth L. Way



                 /s/ EARL D. HOLTON                                                            /s/ K. WHIPPLE
-----------------------------------------------------                  ----------------------------------------------------
                    Earl D. Holton                                                         Kenneth Whipple


                                                   /s/ JOHN B. YASINSKY
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                     John B. Yasinsky
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

Statement of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Pacific Enterprises (the "Company") certifies that:

the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Annual Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

February 22, 2006

/s/Edwin A. Guiles

______________________

Edwin A. Guiles

Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND> 
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1996, and is qualified in its entirety by 
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>           12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                     DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                  5392
<SECURITIES>                           19028
<RECEIVABLES>                          28200
<ALLOWANCES>                             907
<INVENTORY>                            32322
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       88527
<PP&E>                                 86126
<DEPRECIATION>                         34322
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        152176
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  34521
<BONDS>                                15900
<COMMON>                                 142
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                             97801
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          152176
<SALES>                               155946
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      155946
<CGS>                                  92523
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          92523
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       46016
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      1594
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        19908
<INCOME-TAX>                            6441
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    13467
<DISCONTINUED>                             0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0 
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                           13467
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            .93
<EPS-DILUTED>                            .93

        

</TABLE>
# C_2022054EN.01000101.xml

| 1.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 54/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 54/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10385 – GENSTAR CAPITAL / TA ASSOCIATES / 20-20 / COMPUSOFT)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 54/01)

On 9 November 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10385. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10385. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1



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 on Form 10-K (the Report) of Acceptance Insurance Companies Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2003, I, John E. Martin, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge 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 Company.



/s/ John E. MartinJohn E. MartinTitle: President and Chief Executive OfficerAcceptance Insurance Companies Inc.Date: July 20, 2004
# Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District

JULY 15, 2014

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b).

1. Case No. SD32931

Re: STATE OF MISSOURI,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

vs. JEREMIAH ASHLEY KIRK,

Defendant-Appellant.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            1645
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5175
<ALLOWANCES>                                       247
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  8158
<PP&E>                                            4502
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3040
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   15718
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             5330
<BONDS>                                            255
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       3127
<COMMON>                                         39196
<OTHER-SE>                                     (32190)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     15718
<SALES>                                          23058
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 23058
<CGS>                                            17990
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    17990
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   411
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 101
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    892
<INCOME-TAX>                                       178
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                714
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       714
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .028
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .028
        

</TABLE>
| **Loan Servicing (Details) (USD $)In Thousands, unless otherwise specified** | Dec. 31, 2013 | Dec. 31, 2012 | Dec. 31, 2011 |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------|---------------|---------------|
| **Banking and Thrift [Abstract]**                                            |          |          |          |
| Unpaid Principal Balance Of Loans Serviced For Others                        | $ 271,871     | $ 167,879     | $ 136,867     |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Unpaid Principal Balance Of Loans Serviced For Others
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**frme_UnpaidPrincipalBalanceOfLoansServicedForOthers**Namespace Prefix:**frme_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**debit**Period Type:**instant |
| X                                                                                                                                                            |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**us-gaap_BankingAndThriftAbstract**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |