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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,609
<SECURITIES>                                     2,984
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,996
<ALLOWANCES>                                       470
<INVENTORY>                                      3,667
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,055
<PP&E>                                          24,900
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,325
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  68,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,653
<BONDS>                                         16,027
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,106
<COMMON>                                         3,518
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    68,161
<SALES>                                         74,277
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                74,277
<CGS>                                           59,430
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   71,831
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,381
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,274
<INCOME-TAX>                                       792
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,232
<DISCONTINUED>                                  21,322
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,554
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     5.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     5.50
        

</TABLE>
#### MORELOS v. MILDE.

No. 8661.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Oct. 28, 1931.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 18, 1931.

Seabury, George & Taylor, of Brownsville, for appellant.

Abney & Whitelaw, of Brownsville, and King, Wood & Morrow, of Houston, for ap-pellee.

PLY, C. J.

This is a suit for damages arising from personal injuries inflicted in an automobile collision. Appellee filed a -cross-action, but withdrew it, and, upon his motion, the court instructed a verdict for appellee.

Appellant swore that he was traveling along the paved main highway between Brownsville and Point Isabel; that at a certain point .he saw a man in an automobile approaching on an unpaved dirt road. He blew his horn and approached the intersection, and attempted to pass, but appellee ran ■his car into him. He was badly injured. Appellant swore, and he was supported by a reluctant sheriff, that it was the custom for automobile drivers approaching a main thoroughfare on an unpaved road to give the right of way to drivers on the main highway. Appellant swore that he did all in his power to prevent the collision. These facts in the light of an instructed verdict.

The statute, Pen. Code 1925, § 801, must be given a reasonable construction in its requirement that in approaching the intersection of two roads the person approaching from the right hand must be given the right of way. We cannot suppose that the Legislature intended to prescribe the stream of traffic on a main road of a county should be interrupted by every passing vehicle from the right, on cowpaths or unworked neighborhood roads, regardless of who approaches the intersection first. According to the testimony of appellant, he saw the approaching car when some distance off and sounded his horn, but no attention was paid to the signal. The statute never intended that a car on a main paved highway should be stopped until all ears in sight could cross the main road.

 It was also a question of fact as to whether the violation, if any, of the statute was the proximate cause of the disaster to the colliding cars. Appellant may have violated the .law of the highway, but, if such violation was not the proximate cause of the collision,- appellant could recover his damages, if the negligence of appellee caused the collision. The violation of a law doés not outlaw *134the man traveling on a highway, and he cannot be injured or killed with impunity because of such violation.

. This is a case for a jury, and it was error for the court to take the case away from •the jury. The issue of proximate cause is one for a jury, even though the injured party 'had violated the law. It would have been proper to instruct the jury, if the facts supported a violation of law, that such violation would preclude a recovery if the same was the proximate cause of the accident. 5 Tex. Jur. § 93, p. 689, and cases cited therein.

The judgment will be reversed, and the cause remanded.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 Date of Report (date of earliest event reported): April 20, 2007
 MARINER ENERGY, INC.
  Delaware
    
    1-32747
    
    86-0460233(State or other jurisdiction of
    
    (Commission
    
    (I.R.S. Employerincorporation or organization)
    
    File Number)
    
    Identification No.)One BriarLake Plaza, Suite 20002000 West Sam Houston Parkway SouthHouston, Texas
    
    77042(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (713) 954-5500
   o
    
    Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)o
    
    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 7.01 Regulation FD DisclosureItem 9.01 Financial Statements and ExhibitsSIGNATURESExhibit IndexFBR Conference Call Presentation    Table of Contents  
 Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure.
  
 Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits
  Number
    
    Description99.1
    
    FBR Conference Call Presentation dated April 20, 2007.
 2




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  MARINER ENERGY, INC.Date: April 20, 2007
    
    By:
    
    /s/ John H. KarnesJohn H. Karnes,Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer
 3




---



##### Table of Contents



Exhibit Index
 Number
    
    Description99.1
    
    FBR Conference Call Presentation dated April 20, 2007.
#### TOLBERT et al. v. PORTER.

No. 1919.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Waco.

June 17, 1937.

R. D. Evans, of Waco, for plaintiffs in error.

Barney A. Garrett and E. D. Garrett, both of Waco, for defendant in error.

ALEXANDER, Justice.

This is an action in trespass to try title brought by Caroline Tolbert and husband against Henry Porter to recover title and possession of 2.87 acres of land. The case was tried without a jury and judgment rendered for defendant. Plaintiffs sued out this writ of error.

The only assignment of error and proposition thereunder presented by plaintiffs in error are as follows: “First Assignment. The Court erred in holding that the law and the facts were with the defendant and granting judgment for defendant. Proposition One. Where the preponderance of the evidence is against the findings of fact, cause should be reversed.” It is quite evident that the above assignment and the proposition thereunder are insufficient to present reversible error. 3 Tex.Jur. 852; Courts of Civil Appeals Rules No. 26; District Court Rule No. 68; Chapman v. Reese (Tex.Civ.App.) 268 S.W. 967; Tyler County State Bank v. Shivers (Tex.Civ.App.) 281 S.W. 264.

Under the above assignment and proposition, the plaintiffs in error argue that the trial court erred in- its implied finding that the defendant had title to the land in question by limitation. Notwithstanding the defective assignment, we have considered this contention and have concluded that it must be overruled. The defendant claimed title to the land under his father, Cal Porter, who acquired a deed thereto in 1875. Plaintiffs claim title under Betsy Ann Porter, who married Cal Porter in 1885. The evidence was sufficient to show that Cal Porter acquired title to the land by limitation prior to his marriage to Betsy Ann Porter. Cal Porter died about 1887. Whatever title he so acquired passed to his son, Henry Porter, the defendant herein. The land appears to have been set aside to Betsy Ann Porter as her homestead after the death of Cal Porter and she continued to occupy the same as such until her death in 1935. In 1892, while she so occupied the property, one Smith asserted some title to the land and she paid him a small sum of money for a deed thereto in order to avoid being disturbed in possession of the land. Betsy Ann Porter occupied the property as a homestead from the death of Cal Porter, in 1887, to the time of her death in 1935, but it does not appear that she ever brought home to the children of Cal Porter notice that she was holding same adversely to them. Since she had the right to occupy the property as a homestead, her mere occupancy thereof, without bringing home to the children of Cal Porter notice that she was claiming the same adversely to them, did not start the run*460ning of limitation in her favor. Wiggins v. Holmes (Tex.Civ.App.) 39 S.W.(2d) 162, pars. 4 and 5, and authorities there cited.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


I, Helaine M. Kaplan, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D
required to be filed in respect of periods covered by this report on Form 10-K
of the COMM 2012-CCRE2 Mortgage Trust (the "Exchange Act Periodic Reports");

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act Periodic Reports, taken as a whole,
do 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other
information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by
this report is included in the Exchange Act Periodic Reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in
this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the
Exchange Act Periodic Report, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations
under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be
included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of
noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on
Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: CoreLogic Commercial Real
Estate Services, Inc. as Servicing Function Participant, Midland Loan Services,
Inc., a Division of PNC Bank, National Association as Special Servicer,
National Tax Search, LLC as Servicing Function Participant, Park Bridge Lender
Services LLC as Operating Advisor, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer,
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as
Custodian, Situs Holdings LLC as Operating Advisor for the 260 and 261 Madison
Avenue Loan, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas as Certificate Administrator
for the 260 and 261 Madison Avenue Loan, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company
Americas as Custodian for the 260 and 261 Madison Avenue Loan.


    Dated:   October 28, 2013


    /s/ Helaine M. Kaplan
    Signature

    President
   (Senior Officer in Charge of Securitization of the Depositor)
##### 



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report: August 17, 2007
 
 EL PASO CORPORATION
  Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of 
incorporation or organization)
    
    1-14365
(Commission File Number)
    
    76-0568816
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
 El Paso Building
1001 Louisiana Street
Houston, Texas 77002
 (713) 420-2600
  o
 o
 o
 o




---



##### 



Item 8.01 Other Events.
  Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
  ExhibitNumber
    
    Description99.A
    
    Press Release dated August 17, 2007.




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  EL PASO CORPORATIONBy:
    /s/ John R. SultJohn R. SultSenior Vice President and
Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer) Dated: August 17, 2007




---



##### 



EXHIBIT INDEX
 ExhibitNumber
    
    Description99.A
    
    Press Release dated August 17, 2007.
Annual Compliance Statements
For period of July 1 through December 31, 2012

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2012-C5

Depositor:



Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.
Certificate Administrator:

U.S. Bank National Association



Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, I attest that:

(A)

A review of the activities of Situs Holdings, LLC, as Trust Advisor, during the period of
July 1 through December 31, 2012 and of its performance under this Agreement has been made under my supervision.


(B)

To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  based  on  such  review,  Situs  Holdings,  LLC,  as  Trust
Advisor, has fulfilled all its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such period.





By:
/s/ George Wisniewski



Date:  March 15, 2013
George Wisniewski


Senior Managing Director
----

| (1)    | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Techs Loanstar, Inc. for the period ended July 31, 2010 (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 Techs Loanstar, Inc.                                                                       |

|   | /s/ Barry HollanderName: Barry HollanderTitle: Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Director            (Principal Financial Officer) |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----
/ 

## ,11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

# FILED APR 2 42012 Clerk, U.S. District &Bankruptcy Courts forthe District of Columbia Robert Louis Salter Jr., Plaintiff,
v.
Charles Samuels Jr., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 

# 12 ( J644

MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court onplaintiffspro se complaint seeking class certification and his application to proceed informapauperis. The Court will grant the application and will dismiss the complaint. Plaintiffis a prisoner incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Texarkana, Texas. He seeks to bring a class action against the Bureau ofPrisons on behalfoffederal prisoners nationwide for alleged "overcrowding within the federal prison system." Compl. at 2. Plaintiff"asserts a claim ofsystemic unconstitutionality resulting from overcrowding at the F.C.I.-Texarkana (LOW) prison and contends that these conditions are representative of overcrowding through the entire Federal prison system" in violation ofthe Eighth Amendment. 

### !d. Rule 

### 23 ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure authorizes one or more members ofa class to sue onbehalfofall members provided that, among other specified conditions, the representative party "will fairly and adequately protect the interests ofthe class." Fed. R. Civ. P. 

# 323(a)(4). Prose plaintiffs may not represent otherprose plaintiffs in federal court, however. See 28 U.S.C. 

### § 1654; Oxendine v. Williams, 509 F.2d 1405 (4th Cir. 1975) ("[I]t is plain error to permitthis imprisoned litigant who is unassisted by counsel to represent his fellow inmates in a class action.") (citation omitted); Debrew v. Atwood, No. 10-0650 (JDB),- F. Supp. 2d -, 2012 WL 898786 (Mar. 19, 2012), at *8 (federal prisonerproceedingprose "is not qualified to appear on behalfofanother person") (citing Georgiades v. Martin-Trigona, 729 F.2d 831, 834 (D.C. Cir. 1984)) (other citation omitted); see also Maldonado v. Terhune, 28 F. Supp. 2d 284, 288 (D.N.J. 1998), quoting Caputo v. Fauver, 800 F. Supp. 168, 170 (D.N.J.l992), affd, 995 F.2d 216 (3d Cir. 1993) ("Courts have consistently held that a prisoner actingprose 'is inadequate to represent the interests ofhis fellow inmates in a class action."'). Plaintiffseeks the appointment ofclass counsel, but his claim that the conditions at FCI Texarkana are "representative" ofthose throughout BOP's system is too speculative to warrant appointing counsel from this Court's Civil Pro Bono Panel to, in effect, commence plaintiffs action. Ifplaintiffwere to proceed on his own behalf, this venue would not be proper for litigating his claim predicated on alleged overcrowding at FCI Texarkana. See 28 U.S.C. 

### § 1391(b)(2) (designating the proper venue under the circumstances presented as the 'judicial district in which a substantial part ofthe events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred
...

."). A separate Order ofdismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: April

# i..J_, 2012

# ()&~&. 

# '4-#! United States strict Judge

2
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



The
undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to their knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 of JobLocationMap. (the “Company”)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the
information contained in such periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in such report.





|Very
    truly yours,              
|-----------------------------------
|                                   
|/s/
    Omri Morchi                
|Signature:  Omri
    Morchi        
|Title:
      President and Director
|(Principal
    Executive Officer,) 



|/s/Eden Shoua                                                      | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------ | 
|Eden
    Shoua                                                     | 
|Secretary,
    Treasurer and Director                              | 
|(Principal
    Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer) | 



Dated:
April 8, 2016



A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to
JobLocationMap and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 Quarterly Report of NB Manufacturing, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Derold
L. Kelley, President, Secretary/Treasurer and Director of the Company, 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),as
      applicable, 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.





Date:           November
11, 2009


/s/Derold
L.
Kelley


Derold L.
Kelley


President,
Secretary/Treasurer and Director
# C_2022015EN.01000101.xml

| 12.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 15/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 15/1

---

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2021-2022 SESSION

Sittings of 17 to 21 May 2021

TEXTS ADOPTED

---