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


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<CIK>                         0001013564
<NAME>                        Farm Family Holdings, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           259,956
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          8,602
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            8,949
<EQUITIES>                                     4,730
<MORTGAGE>                                     745
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 286,186
<CASH>                                         5,327
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             15,630
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         13,401
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 380,739
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                163,498
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            69,119
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 12,116
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       53
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,359
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   380,739
<PREMIUMS>                                     42,815
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            4,767
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             126
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 219
<BENEFITS>                                     32,139
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    11,213
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                4,500
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,292
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            3,208
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   3,208
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.61
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 127,568
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            34,132
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              (1,991)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             8,232
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               19,158
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                132,319
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0
        


</TABLE>
#### Jess DIXON v. STATE.

No. 21219.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 12, 1940.

R. W. Webb, of Snyder, and R. Temple Dickson, of Sweetwater, for appellant.

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

GRAVES, Judge.

The appellant was convicted of the theft of one head of cattle, and his punishment assessed at five years’ confinement in the penitentiary. .

. Since his' appeal was perfected, the appellant has filed a written request, verified by his affidavit, asking the privilege of withdrawing his appeal. The request is granted and the appeal ordered dismissed.
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed September 30, 2013.

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 1 3

- 00 116

- CR No. 05

- 13

- 00117

- CR

JENNY REBECCA BONHAM , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial Distri ct Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F12

- 54172

- Q, F12

- 54174

- Q



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices O’Neill, Lang

- Miers, and Evans Opinion b y Justice Lang

- Miers
Jenny Rebecca Bonham waived a jury and pleaded guilty to robbery and evading arrest
while using a vehicle

. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. §§ 29.02(a), 38.04(a), (b)(1)(B) (West 2011
& Supp. 2012)

. The trial court assessed punishment at ten years’ imprisonment in each case

. On
appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous
and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738
(1967). The brief presents a professional evaluatio n of the record showing why, in effect, there
are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App.- 2

- [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of

h er right to file a pro se response, but s he did not file a pro se response.

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief

. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824,
827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases)

. We agree the
appeals are friv olous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably
support the appeal s

. We affirm the trial court’s judgment s

.

/Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIER S JUSTICE

Do Not Publish T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47

130116F.U05- 3

- 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT

JENNY REBECCA BONHAM
, Appellant

No. 05

- 13

- 00116

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas ( Tr.Ct.No. F12

- 54172

- Q). Opinion delivered by Justice Lang

- Miers, Justices O’Neill and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED

.

Judgment entered September 30, 2013.

/Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE- 4

- 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT

JENNY REBECCA BONHAM
, Appellant

No. 05

- 13

- 00117

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F12

- 54174

- Q). Opinion delivered by Justice Lang

- Miers, Justices O’Neill and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED

.

Judgment entered September 30, 2013.

/Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIER S JUSTICE
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

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

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 27, 2009

l0120 

# Order

January 27, 2009

137482

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137482 COA: 276454 Gr Traverse CC: 06-010096-FH CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM KELLMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to appeal the August 19, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# C_2022210EN.01003101.xml

| 25.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 210/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 210/31

---

Commission information notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 210/12)

| Member State | Portugal |
| --- | --- |
| Concerned route | Porto Santo – Funchal – Porto Santo |
| Period of validity of the contract | 3 years following the start of the operation |
| Deadline for submission of tenders | 62 days after the day of publication of the present invitation |
| Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the public service obligations can be obtained | All documents are available from: http://www.saphety.com
  For more information please contact:





  Ministry of Infrastructure and Housing |
| Cabinet of the Secretary of State for Infrastructures |
| Av. Barbosa du Bocage, n.o 5 |
| 1049-039 Lisboa |
| PORTUGAL |

Member State

Portugal

Concerned route

Porto Santo – Funchal – Porto Santo

Period of validity of the contract

3 years following the start of the operation

Deadline for submission of tenders

62 days after the day of publication of the present invitation

Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the public service obligations can be obtained

All documents are available from: http://www.saphety.com

For more information please contact:

Ministry of Infrastructure and Housing

Cabinet of the Secretary of State for Infrastructures

Av. Barbosa du Bocage, n.o 5

1049-039 Lisboa

PORTUGAL

Tel. +351 210426200

Email: gabinete.seinf@mih.gov.pt

---
# C_2022210EN.01000401.xml

| 25.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 210/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 210/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10692 – SEGRO / PSPIB / TARGET ASSET SOUTH PARIS)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 210/04)

On 8 April 2022, 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 32022M10692. 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 32022M10692. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-02-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-02-1997
<CASH>                                       1,536,234
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,172,645
<ALLOWANCES>                                   867,961
<INVENTORY>                                  9,814,682
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,191,972
<PP&E>                                     129,612,934
<DEPRECIATION>                              71,348,374
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             147,077,118
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      108,316,847
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,521,426
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,640,740
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               147,077,118
<SALES>                                    156,099,050
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           156,099,050
<CGS>                                      119,106,451
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              119,106,451
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             179,221
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,136,907
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,143,053
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,993,854
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,993,854
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.38
        

</TABLE>
No. 95-50635

- 1 -

 

* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-50635

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JAMES TYRONE HOSKINS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-94-CR-97-5

- - - - - - - - - -

 April 29, 1996

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Tyrone Hoskins appeals his sentence for bank robbery. 

Our review of the record and the arguments and authorities

convince us that no reversible error was committed. The district

court’s application of the cross-reference provision contained in

U.S.S.G. 2.B3.1(c) was not clearly erroneous. Hoskins has failed

to demonstrate his withdrawal from the joint criminal activity, 

and the murder of Mrs. Parker was reasonably foreseeable in

connection with the bank robbery and botched get-away. United
No. 95-50635

- 2 -

States v. Puig-Infante, 19 F.3d 929, 942, 944-46. (5th Cir.

1994). The district court did not impermissibly rely upon trial

testimony, as the incident referred to by the court was included

in Hoskins’ presentence report.

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the interests of judicial

efficiency, Hoskins’ appeal is severed from that of his

co-defendant, Anthony James Coleman. 

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3004 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 573
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3004

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 25, 2016

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

                             July 14, 2016

              Reported by Ms. Murkowski, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Act to extend the 
    authorization for the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor 
                              Commission.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE GULLAH/GEECHEE 
              CULTURAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR COMMISSION.

    Section 295D(d) of the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Act (Public 
Law 109-338; 120 Stat. 1833; 16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking 
``10 years'' and inserting ``15 years''.
                                                       Calendar No. 573

114th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3004

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To amend the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Act to extend the 
    authorization for the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor 
                              Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 14, 2016

                       Reported without amendment
```
#### THE GREAT ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA COMPANY, Relator, v. Honorable Samuel P. WILLSON, Chief Justice, et al., Respondents.

Motion No. 9935.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Jan. 6, 1932.

Touchstone, Wight, Gormley & Price and Robert B. Holland, all of Dallas, for relator.^

PER CURIAM.

The relator has a complete remedy secured by writ of error by articles 1$21 and 1728, Rev. Stat. Mandamus will no longer lie to require the Court of Civil Appeals to certify the question of conflict in this character of case; the former practice was based on the absence of such remedy. International & G. N. R. Co. v. Pleasants, 116 Tex. 568, 296 S. W. 282.

The motion for leave to file petition for mandamus is therefore refused.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

               STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (1)
                (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  THREE MONTHS ENDED         SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                ----------------------    ----------------------
                                                                  MAR 30,       MAR 31,     MAR 30,      MAR 31,
                                                                   1997          1996        1997         1996
                                                                ---------    ---------    ---------     --------
<S>                                                             <C>          <C>          <C>           <C>     
Net income(1).................................................  $   2,040    $   1,264    $   4,597     $  3,204
                                                                ---------    ---------    ---------     --------
  Average shares outstanding..................................      8,888        6,795        8,888        6,795
  Common equivalent shares....................................        117                       126          126
  Assumed shares sold to prepay shareholder distribution (2)..                     890                       890
                                                                ---------    ---------    ---------     --------
  Weighted average number of common shares....................      9,005        7,685        9,014        7,685
                                                                =========    =========    =========     ========
  Earnings per common and common equivalent share.............  $    0.23    $    0.16    $    0.51     $   0.42
                                                                =========    =========    =========     ========
</TABLE>

(1)      The computations set forth for the three and six fiscal months ended
         March 31, 1996 are based on pro forma net income which reflects the
         recording by the Company of additional taxes as if the Company were
         treated as a C corporation for all periods presented.

(2)      Reflects the estimated number of shares required to be sold by the
         Company (as calculated based upon the net proceeds of the initial
         public offering) to pay the pre-offering shareholder distributions of
         approximately $9,952. The total estimated shares of 890 were assumed to
         be outstanding for both periods of fiscal 1996. Subsequent to the
         initial public offering, the shares were actually outstanding and are
         therefore included in the "average shares outstanding" calculation
         above.



                                       15
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2792 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2792

   To require that any revision to, or establishment of, a national 
 primary or secondary ambient air quality standard be made by statute, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 16, 2015

 Mr. Grothman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require that any revision to, or establishment of, a national 
 primary or secondary ambient air quality standard be made by statute, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Manufacturers First Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. REVISION TO, OR ESTABLISHMENT OF, NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 
              STANDARDS BY STATUTE ONLY.

    Except as provided by a Federal statute enacted after the date of 
enactment of this Act--
            (1) the national primary and secondary ambient air quality 
        standard for any air pollutant under section 109 of the Clean 
        Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409), as in effect on the date of enactment 
        of this Act, shall remain in effect; and
            (2) notwithstanding any provision of the Clean Air Act (42 
        U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), the Administrator of the Environmental 
        Protection Agency may not issue, implement, or enforce--
                    (A) any revision to any such standard; or
                    (B) any new such standard.
                                 <all>
```