alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### HICKS v. WALLIS LUMBER CO.

No. 9309.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

April 4, 1934.

John T. Spann, of Crystal City, for appellants.

Geo. C. Herman and Jackson & Crawford, all of Crystal City, for appellee.

'MURRAY, Justice.

This suit was instituted by appellee, Wallis Lumber Company, against B. Hicks and wife, Laura Hicks, to recover the balance due upon a certain note and to foreclose a material-men’s and mechanics’ lien on the homestead of appellants. The Wallis Lumber Company was given a verdict as prayed for and Hicks and wife have appealed.

The agreement creating the first lien was alleged to have been executed by Hicks and ■wife on November 1, 1928, and the agree-, ment creating a second lien executed on December 26, 1929. A renewal and extension of these two agreements was alleged to have been executed by Hicks and wife on April 10, 1930. The suit was based upon the renewal and extension agreement of April 10, 1930.

Appellants offered to prove on the trial that the material and labor were furnished in each instance before the agreement creating the materialmen’s and mechanics’ lien was signed and filed in the county clerk’s office. This clearly would be a good defense to the original lien if established, because article 5460, R. S. 1925, requires that before a materialmen’s and mechanics’ lien can be established against a homestead, the agreement must be in writing, signed by the husband and wife, privily acknowledged by the wife, and filed in the county clerk’s office before the material is furnished or the labor performed. The trial judge seems to have been of the opinion that the renewal and extension agreement of April 10, 1930, would estop Hicks and his wife from asserting that the original lien was void and of no effect, and upon this theory excluded the evidence. This was error. If the original contract did not establish a valid lien against the homestead, one could not be created by a subsequent renewal and extension agreement.

An exception to this rule exists where innocent third persons have been misled to their injury by the conduct of the husband and wife. Appellee attempts to show that there are rights of innocent third persons in this case. One Simmons purchased the note secured by this alleged lien and held same for some time. The lumber company, however, was an indorser on the note, and when appellants defaulted in their payments, appellee repurchased the note and thus it became the property of the original payee and all rights of third persons were effectively eliminated from this transaction.

The trial court also committed error in not permitting appellants to introduce evidence that they had not acknowledged the original contract. The proper acknowledgment by the husband and wife to the original contract is also required by article 5460, before any lien can be established against the homestead.

The judgment of the trial court wiU be reversed and the cause remanded.
INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT'S CONSENT



We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statement of
Pease Oil and Gas Company on Form S-3 (SEC File No.  333-31921 with an effective
date of August 22, 1997) of our report dated  March 18, 1998 on our audits of
the  consolidated  financial  statements  of  Pease  Oil and Gas  Company  as of
December 31,  1997,  and for the years ended  December 31, 1997 and 1996,  which
report is  included in this Annual  Report of Pease Oil and Gas  Company on Form
10-KSB.



/s/ HEIN + ASSOCIATES LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 30, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF APPLIED ANALYTICAL INDUSTRIES, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1,364
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,146
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,958
<PP&E>                                          42,347
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 110,924
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,203
<BONDS>                                            626
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            18
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   110,924
<SALES>                                         76,581
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                76,581
<CGS>                                           40,675
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   74,429
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   344
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,599
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    897
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (441)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,338
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,338
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08


</TABLE>
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Regina Ware, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 1796 C.D. 2017

:

Unemployment Compensation :

Board of Review, :

Respondent :

O R D E R

NOW, September 6, 2018

, upon consideration of petitioner’s

application for re consideration , the application is denied.

MARY HANNAH LEAVITT,

President Judge
ADDENDUM TO CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE AND
                        WARRANT TO PURCHASE COMMON STOCK

This Addendum to Convertible Debenture and Warrant to Purchase Common Stock
("Addendum") is entered into as of the  29th day of October 2004 by and between
Radix Marine, Inc., a Nevada corporation ("Radix"), and La Jolla Cove Investors,
Inc., a California corporation ("LJCI").

WHEREAS, Radix and LJCI are parties to that certain 7 3/4 % Convertible
Debenture dated as of March 17, 2004 ("Debenture"); and

WHEREAS, Radix and LJCI are parties to that certain Warrant to Purchase Common
Stock dated as of March 17, 2004 ("Warrant"); and

WHEREAS, Radix has requested that LJCI increase its Debenture conversions and
Warrant exercises by reinstating the requirement for minimum monthly Debenture
conversions and Warrant exercises; and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Debenture and Warrant in certain
respects.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained
herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Radix and LJCI agree as follows:

1.    All terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the
      definitions set forth in the Debenture.

2.    Section 4 of the June 24, 2004 Addendum to Convertible Debenture and
      Warrant to Purchase Common Stock between Radix and LJCI is hereby
      cancelled.

3.    The 20 Trading Days period set forth in section 3.1(a) of the Debenture is
      changed to 45 Trading Days for all Common Shares obtained under
      registration statements filed after the date hereof.

4.    Beginning in the next full month after the next Registration Statement
      containing Common Shares for LJCI is declared effective, LJCI will use
      prepaid Warrant credits for no more than 50% of the remaining Warrant
      exercises for the month until the prepaid Warrant credits have been fully
      utilized.

5.    The terms of this Addendum shall be null and void if Radix does not
      include at least 170,000,000 shares of common stock on behalf of LJCI in
      the next Registration Statement.

6.    Except as specifically amended herein, all other terms and conditions of
      the Debenture and Warrant shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WINESS WHEREOF, Radix and LJCI have caused this Addendum to be signed by its
duly authorized officers on the date first set forth above.

Radix Marine, Inc.                            La Jolla Cove Investors, Inc.

By: __________________________                By: __________________________

Name: _______________________                 Name: ________________________

Title: ________________________               Title: _________________________


                                       1
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43644-43645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18156]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7963]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Byzantine Art in the Mary and Michael Jaharis 
Galleries of Greek, Roman and Byzantine Art''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 
257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Byzantine Art in the Mary and Michael 
Jaharis Galleries of Greek, Roman and Byzantine Art'' imported from 
abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Art Institute 
of Chicago, Chicago, IL, from on or about November 10, 2012, until on 
or about November 8, 2015, and at possible additional exhibitions or 
venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have 
ordered that Public

[[Page 43645]]

Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: July 18, 2012.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-18156 Filed 7-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12549]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for temporary display in the exhibition “Egon Schiele: Living Landscapes” at the Neue Galerie New York, in New York, New York, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Nicole L. Elkon,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2024-21636 Filed 9-20-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
#### NEW v. STATE.

No. 18693.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 23, 1936.

Rehearing Denied April 28, 1937.

Baskett & Parks, of Dallas, for appellant.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for conversion by bailee; punishment, five years in the penitentiary.

The record is here without statement of facts or bills of exceptions. The indictment contains three counts, conviction being upon, the third, which charged that appellant was in possession of a certain stock certificate for 50 shares of a named corporation, which had been bailed to him by Mrs. Brumbelow, it being further alleged that 26 shares of the stock evidenced by said certificate belonged to appellant and 24 shares of the same was the property of Mrs. Brumbelow, “which said certificate was by its owner, the said Mrs. J. B. Brumbelow, endorsed and placed in the possession of and bailed to Ben E. New, he agreeing to return to her, Mrs. Brumbelow, a certificate of stock issued by said- corporation for 24 shares of said stock of the • value of $45.00 per share,” etc.

We find no brief on file, and in an oral argument appellant attacks the sufficiency of the indictment. We are not able to conclude the - indictment fundamentally erroneous. If we understand same, the indictment charges that Mrs. Brumbelow was the owner of the stock certificate in question, and even though it be further alleged that certain shares of the stock evidenced by said certificate belonged to appellant, this creates no such situation as would make the indictment bad. It was alleged in the indictment also that this stock certificate was bailed to appellant by its owner for certain specified purposes, and that he fraudulently and without her consent converted to his own use the whole of said certificate, and also the said 24 shares of the value of $1,000.

We recognize that it was no easy task to properly draw an indictment under, the facts of this case, but are of opinion that a felony is sufficiently charged, to wit, the fraudulent appropriation of property of the value of more than $50, which, appellant held 'by virtue of a contract of bailment with the owner of said property. Some argument was advanced as to the impossibility of alleging fraudulent appropriation or bailment of partnership property, but for aught we know there was written in the stock certificate mentioned' a sufficient statement to show that 24 shares of the stock evidenced by the certificate belonged to Mrs. Brumbelow, and that 26 shares of the stock so evidenced belonged to this appellant. This would not appear to us to bring the case within the rules of partnership. Nor are we able to agree with appellant that the charge of the court was fundamentally erroneous.

*48Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, Judge.

. Appellant presents some rather interesting questions in his motion for rehearing regarding the instructions of the court, claiming that fundamental error appears therein. We find ourselves unable to appraise the matter in the absence of the facts. ' . ,

The motion for rehearing is overruled.
# C_2023242EN.01000701.xml

| 7.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/7

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.104957

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 242/06)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 16.2.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.104957 |
| Member State | France |
| Region | France |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | SA.104957 — Aide sous forme de compensation à la société Air France |
| Legal basis | Finance Law for 2006 no 2005-1719 of 30 December 2005 |
| Type of measure | Ad Hoc Case
  Société Air France S.A. |
| Objective | Compensation of damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Overall budget: 1 405 600 000 EUR
  Annual budget: 1 405 600 000 EUR |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | |
| Economic sectors | Passenger air transport |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Agence des participations de l'Etat |
| BATIMENT COLBERT 139 RUE DE BERCY 75572 PARIS CEDEX 12 |

Date of adoption of the decision

16.2.2023

Aid number

SA.104957

Member State

France

Region

France

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

SA.104957 — Aide sous forme de compensation à la société Air France

Legal basis

Finance Law for 2006 no 2005-1719 of 30 December 2005

Type of measure

Ad Hoc Case

Société Air France S.A.

Objective

Compensation of damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: 1 405 600 000 EUR

Annual budget: 1 405 600 000 EUR

Intensity

Duration

Economic sectors

Passenger air transport

Name and address of the granting authority

Agence des participations de l'Etat

BATIMENT COLBERT 139 RUE DE BERCY 75572 PARIS CEDEX 12

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
1 

### King, Melanie

From: King, Melanie

Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 3:35 PM

To: Higgins, Cortney

Cc: Wayland, Robertj; Culligan, Kevin; Elman, Barry; CurryBrown, Amanda; Johnson, Mary

Subject: RE: Response to Interagency Comments under EO 12866 on RIN 2060-AR33 Supplemental

NPRM

Hi Cortney,

Following up on the comment that said “EPA should state and/or seek comment on whether such tribes need to have

TAS status in order to participate in multi

‐ jurisdictional implementation plans.”

Our response to the comment is as follows: whether a tribe will need to have TAS status to participate in a multi

‐ jurisdictional implementation plan depends on the actual structure of the plan in question. Since we won’t know how a

particular multi

‐ jurisdictional implementation plan is structured until the plan is submitted to EPA for approval, we

cannot address this question in context of this proposal.

Melanie King

Energy Strategies Group

Sector Policies and Programs Division

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mail Code D243

‐ 01

RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541

‐ 2469

Fax: (919) 541

‐ 5450

king.melanie@epa.gov

From: King, Melanie

Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 9:25 PM

To: Higgins, Cortney

Cc: Wayland, Robertj; Culligan, Kevin; Elman, Barry; CurryBrown, Amanda; Johnson, Mary

Subject: Response to Interagency Comments under EO 12866 on RIN 2060

‐ AR33 Supplemental NPRM



### Hi Cortney,

Attached are our responses to the comments on the supplemental proposal. Please note that there is one

comment that that we are still working on a response for and we'll follow up on that one. Also attached is the

FR notice that had interagency comments, and I have added comment bubbles responding to those

comments. We are working on an updated FR notice to send to you that incorporates the edits we are making

in response to the interagency comments.

I'll be out most of the day tomorrow but please don't hesitate to follow up with Bob if you have any questions

tomorrow. I do plan to be back on Friday.

Thanks,

Melanie King

Energy Strategies Group

Sector Policies and Programs Division

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency2 Mail Code D243-01

RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-2469

Fax: (919) 541-5450

king.melanie@epa.gov
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 182 (Thursday, September 19, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 76870]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-21273]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules; Meeting of the Judicial 
Conference

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States.

ACTION: Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules; notice of open meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules will hold a meeting 
in a hybrid format with remote attendance options on November 8, 2024 
in New York, NY. The meeting is open to the public for observation but 
not participation. An agenda and supporting materials will be posted at 
least 7 days in advance of the meeting at: https://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/records-and-archives-rules-committees/agenda-books.

DATES: November 8, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. Thomas Byron III, Esq., Chief 
Counsel, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the U.S. 
Courts, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus 
Circle NE, Suite 7-300, Washington, DC 20544, Phone (202) 502-1820, 
[email protected].

(Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2073.)

    Dated: September 13, 2024.
Shelly L. Cox,
Management Analyst, Rules Committee Staff.
[FR Doc. 2024-21273 Filed 9-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
```
#### Ex parte Artie HUTCHINSON.

No. 20235.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 23, 1938.

W. T. .Locke, of Wichita Falls, for appellant.

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

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from the order of the District Court of Wichita County refusing the relator’s application for a writ of habeas corpus.

The question presented is identically the same as that which is before the court in the companion case of Ex parte Ola Steele, Tex.Cr.App., 121 S.W.2d 605, this day decided. Upon the authority of that case and the precedents cited therein, the appeal in the present instance is dismissed.