alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                   EXHIBIT 11
 
                             AMSOUTH BANCORPORATION
 
          STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         THREE MONTHS ENDED     YEAR ENDED
                                             DECEMBER 31        DECEMBER 31
                                         ------------------- -----------------
                                           1996      1995      1996     1995
                                         --------- --------- -------- --------
                                         (IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
<S>                                      <C>       <C>       <C>      <C>
Net income.............................. $  51,615 $  47,892 $182,676 $174,955
                                         ========= ========= ======== ========
Average shares of common stock
 outstanding............................    54,775    58,231   56,605   58,262
                                         ========= ========= ======== ========
Earnings per common share............... $    0.92 $    0.82 $   3.23 $   3.00
                                         ========= ========= ======== ========
</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-86426) of Affiliated Computer Services, Inc. of
our report dated July 28, 1998, except as to Note 15, which is as of August 10,
1998, appearing on page 34 of the Annual Report to Stockholders which is
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to
the incorporation by reference of our report on the Financial Statement
Schedule, which appears on page F-1 of this Form 10-K.



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Dallas, Texas
September 28, 1998
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 170 (Thursday, October 30, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10525]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to 
the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).
  The legislative clerk read the following letter:

                                                      U.S. Senate,

                                        President pro tempore,

                                 Washington, DC, October 30, 2008.
     To the Senate:
       Under the provisions of rule I, Section 3, of the Standing 
     Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable Sheldon 
     Whitehouse, a Senator from the State of Rhode Island, to 
     perform the duties of the Chair.
                                                   Robert C. Byrd,
                                            President pro tempore.

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro 
tempore.

                          ____________________
```
#### ALEXANDER S. ROWLAND v. THOMAS J. JONES.

In cases of bailment, what is due care is a question to be decided by the-Court.' Whether the bailee has exercised such care is a question to be decided by the jury. Therefore where A brought an action against B to recover the value of a horse, hired to B: Held, That it was not error for his Honor to charge the jury “ that it was for the jury to say from the evidence whether the defendant had exercised that care which a prudent man would have used with his own property.”

Civil actioN to recover the value of a horse, tried before Clark, *J.,*at Fail Term, 1874, RobesoN Superior Court.

All the facts necessary to an understanding of the case are Stated in the opinion of the Court.

There was a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.

*W. McL.*McKay, for the appellant.

A7. *A. McLean*and Leitch, contra.

Reade, J.

The defendant hired of the plaintiff a horse and buggy and driver to go from L. to F., a distance of 33 miles, which he traveled in seven hours and a half, on a very hot day in September, and the horse was overcome with heat and died.

The defendant asked his Honor to charge, that there was no such negligence as to make him liable. ITis Honor declined; but charged that it was for the jury to say from the evidence “ whether the defendant had exercised that care which a prudent man would have used with his own property.”

We think this charge was right. What is due care is a question for the Court; and his Honor correctly defined it to be “the care which a prudent man would take of his own.” Whether the defendant took such care depended upon the facts which the jury should find. And the jury found that he did not. The facts are not stated in detail; and at the first blush it does not seem that 33 miles in seven hours is hard *53driving. But then the condition of the road, the supply of water; &c., make a great difference. Deep sand, no water, a heavy load and a hot sun may have exhausted the horse. The testimony was that he was “overcome with heat and died next morning.” And the jury find the fact that the defendant did not take the care which a prudent inan would of his own.

There Í3 no error.

Pí:k Ctjkiam.

The judgment must be affirmed.
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [S-95-2024]

      ( print page 88004)    
Notice is hereby given of the withdrawal of the application submitted by the Sanford Airport Authority, grantee of FTZ 250, requesting authority to establish a subzone on behalf of Boss Laser, LLC in Sanford, Florida. The application was docketed on August 15, 2024 (88 FR 67589, August 21, 2024). The withdrawal was requested by the grantee on October 31, 2024.

Dated: November 1, 2024.

Elizabeth Whiteman,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2024-25771 Filed 11-5-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ED SANCHEZ D/B/A DELUXE AUTO 

SERVICES,

 Appellant,

V.

CEDRICK THOMAS,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

 

No. 08-22-00220-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law #2

of Travis County, Texas 

(TC# C-1-CV-19-009616) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether the appeal should 

be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Finding that Appellant did not timely file his notice of appeal, 

we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

A civil appeal is perfected when the notice of appeal is filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1; Restrepo 

v. First Nat’l Bank of Dona Ana County, N.M., 892 S.W.2d 237, 238 (Tex.App.—El Paso 1995, 

no writ) (per curiam) (applying former TEX. R. APP. P. 40(a)(1)). The notice of appeal must be 

filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed unless the appellant files a timely motion for 

new trial. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. (a)(1). If such motion for new trial is filed, the notice of appeal 

must be filed within ninety days after the judgment is signed. Id. To be timely, the motion for new 

trial must be filed within thirty days after the judgment or other appealable order is signed. TEX.
2

R. CIV. P. 329b(a). Still, a notice of appeal is considered timely, if filed within fifteen days of the 

due date and accompanied by a reasonable explanation for the failure to file on the date due. 

Vergburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997).

Appellant filed a notice of appeal on September 30, 2022, attempting to appeal the trial 

court’s final judgment rendered on June 6, 2022. The notice of appeal further stated that a motion 

for new trial was filed on July 5, 2022. As a result, Appellant’s notice of appeal was due to be filed 

on September 5, 2022. Yet, Appellant did not file it until September 30, 2022, more than fifteen 

days late. A timely notice of appeal is essential to invoking this Court’s jurisdiction. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.1(b), 26.1.

On October 27, 2022, the Clerk of this Court sent Appellant a letter regarding the filing of 

the notice of appeal because we were concerned it was not timely perfected. The letter gave notice 

of our intent to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, within 10 days, unless grounds were shown for 

the Court to continue the appeal. See TEX.R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3(b), 42.3(a). To date, no response 

has been filed or received responding to or otherwise providing grounds for continuing this appeal. 

Accordingly, we find that Appellant failed to perfect his appeal because he filed the notice of 

appeal outside of the applicable time limits. This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 42.3(a), (c), 43.2(f).

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

November 9, 2022

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
ATTACHMENT VI 

OPTIONAL 

POLLUTION PREVENTION INFORMATION
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 86851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25263]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 31, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 22, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request To Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 510 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-127, K2025-125.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-25263 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
**EXHIBIT 10.Y.1****AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE****EL PASO CORPORATION****2005 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS**     WHEREAS, El Paso Corporation (the “Company”) maintains the El Paso Corporation 2005Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the “Plan”), effective as of May 26, 2005; and     WHEREAS, Section 10.7 of the Plan permits the Board of Directors or the Management Committee(as defined in the Plan) from time to time to amend the Plan, in whole or in part; and     WHEREAS, it is intended hereby to amend the Plan to comply with Section 409A of the InternalRevenue Code of 1986, as amended.     NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as follows:     1. Section 5.5 is hereby added to the Plan to read as follows:     “**5.5 Deferrals Under the Prior Plan**     Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, any deferrals made pursuant toSection 5.2 of the 1995 Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors (“Prior Plan”)(and any Conversion Premium set forth in Section 6.2(a) of the Prior Plan thereon)during the calendar year 2005 shall be deemed to be deferrals pursuant to Section 5.2of this Plan (and the Conversion Premium of Section 6.2 of this Plan).”     2. Section 7.2 is hereby added to the Plan to read as follows:     “**7.2 Long-Term Equity Credit Under the Prior Plan**     Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, any Long-Term Equity Credit madepursuant to Section 7.1 of the Prior Plan during the calendar year 2005 shall bedeemed to be a Long-Term Equity Credit under Section 7.1 of this Plan.”     3. Section 9.3(c) is hereby removed from the Plan.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this amendment has been executed by the undersigned, thereunto dulyauthorized, effective as of January 1, 2007.      EL PASO CORPORATION
##### 



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 10-K/A
 (Amendment No. 1)
 (Mark One)
 þ
    
    Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007.
 or
 o
    
    Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
 Commission File Number: 000-24799
 THE CORPORATE EXECUTIVE BOARD COMPANY
  Delaware
    
    52-2056410(State or other jurisdiction of 
incorporation or organization)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)1919 North Lynn StreetArlington, Virginia
    
    22209(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (571) 303-3000
 Title of each class
    
    Name of each exchange on which registeredCommon Stock, par value $0.01 per share
    
    The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
 Not applicable
 þ o
 o þ
 þ o
 þ
   Large accelerated filer þ
    
    Accelerated filer o
    
    Non-accelerated filer o
    
    Smaller reporting company o(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 o þ




---



##### 



DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
  EXPLANATORY NOTE
  PART III
 Item 12.
    
    Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder
Matters.
 Equity Compensation Plan Information
  Equity Compensation Plan Information(A)
    
    
    (B)
    
    
    (C)Number OfSecurities To Be
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Number of SecuritiesIssued Upon
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Remaining AvailableExercise Of
    
    
    Weighted-Average
    
    
    For Future Issuances underOutstanding
    
    
    Exercise Price Of
    
    
    Equity Compensation PlansOptions, Warrants
    
    
    Outstanding Options,
    
    
    (Excluding SecuritiesPlan Category
    
    And Rights
    
    
    Warrants And Rights
    
    
    Reflected In Column (A))Equity
compensation plans
approved by
stockholders
    
    
    3,131,905
    
    
    $
    66.05
    
    
    
    3,805,631Equity compensation
plans not approved
by stockholders(1)
    
    
    461,635
    
    
    
    40.53
    
    
    
    Total
    
    
    3,593,540
    
    
    $
    64.59
    
    
    
    3,805,631




---



##### 



SIGNATURE
 Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized, dated as of April 30, 2008.
 The Corporate Executive Board CompanyBy:
    /s/ Timothy R. YostTimothy R. YostChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer)
**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**

I,Harvey R. Blau, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

The Form 10-K/A of AeroflexIncorporated for the period ended June 30, 2006 fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained insuch report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial   condition and results of operations ofAeroflex Incorporated for the periods presented.
|        | /s/ HARVEY R. BLAU       |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | Name: Harvey R. Blau     |
|   | Date: September 19, 2006 |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to Aeroflex Incorporated and will be retained by AeroflexIncorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 698 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                 S. 698

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 27, 2000

                 Referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To review the suitability and feasibility of recovering costs of high 
 altitude rescues at Denali National Park and Preserve in the State of 
                    Alaska, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
That no later than nine months after the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the 
``Secretary'') shall complete a report on the suitability and 
feasibility of recovering the costs of high altitude rescues on Mt. 
McKinley, within Denali National Park and Preserve. The Secretary shall 
also report on the suitability and feasibility of requiring climbers to 
provide proof of medical insurance prior to the issuance of a climbing 
permit by the National Park Service. The report shall also review the 
amount of fees charged for a climbing permit and make such 
recommendations for changing the fee structure as the Secretary deems 
appropriate. Upon completion, the report shall be submitted to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, and the 
Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives.

            Passed the Senate November 19, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                    GARY SISCO,

                                                             Secretary.
```
OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE

ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

Re:
Norwest Funding, Inc. ("Owner"),
Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation ("Company"),
Master Servicing Agreement dated as April 1, 1998 ("Agreement")

Pursuant to the above Agreement, the Company hereby states:

               1. A review of the  activities  of the  Company  during  the 1998
calendar year and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under the
supervision of each of the undersigned officers.

               2. To the best of each such  officer's  knowledge,  based on such
review,  the Company has  fulfilled  all of its material  obligations  under the
Agreement in all material respects throughout such year.

Dated: March 26, 1999

Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation

By:

Linzy S. Banks, Vice President

John M. Wheeler, Senior Vice President
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA
, Respondent
,

v.

JASON FRANCIS PACYNA
, Petitioner

.
No. 1 CA

- CR 22

- 0166 PRPC FILED 10

- 25

- 2022

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2018

- 152602

- 001 The Honorable Katherine Cooper , Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney ’ s Office
, Phoenix By Daniel Strange Counsel for Respondent

Jason Francis Pacyna , Yuma PetitionerSTATE v. PACYNA Decision of the Court

2 MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma , Judge Cynthia J. Bailey
, and Vice Chief Judge David B. Gass delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM :

¶1 Petitioner Jason Francis Pacyna seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post

- conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Proce dure 32.1. This is Pacyna’s first petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, this court will not distur b a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post

- conviction relief. S ee S tate v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 577 ¶ 19 (2012). Petitioner has the burden to show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for post

conviction relief. See State v. P oblete
, 227 Ari z. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011)

. ¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief and the petition for review. This court finds t he petitioner has not established error

. ¶4 This court grants review but den ies relief.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors and Shareholders
K-Tron International, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-52523, 333-26531, 33-07921, 33-39039, 33-39040, 33-08043 and 2-72898)
on Form S-8 of K-Tron International, Inc. of our report dated February 10, 2003
with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of K-Tron International, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 28, 2002 and the related consolidated statements of
income, changes in shareholders' equity, and cash flows for the year ended
December 28, 2002, and the related financial statement schedule, which report
appears in the December 28, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of K-Tron
International, Inc.

Our report refers to our audit of the disclosures added to revise the fiscal
2001 and fiscal 2000 consolidated financial statements, as more fully described
in Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements. However, we were not engaged
to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the fiscal 2001 and fiscal 2000
consolidated financial statements other than with respect to such disclosures.

                                  /s/ KPMG LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 25, 2003