alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Andrews Kurth LLP

600 Travis, Suite 4200

Houston, Texas 77002

713.220.4200 Phone

713.220.4285 Fax

andrewskurth.com

Frederick D. Junkin

713.220.4766 Phone

713.238.7387 Fax

fredjunkin@andrewskurth.com

HOU:3600097.1 

 

October 14, 2015 

By Electronic Filing 

Honorable Christopher A. Prine

Clerk of the Court

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

301 Fannin, Suite 245

Houston, Texas 77002

Re: No. 14-14-00938-CV; Jose Gerardo Padilla, et al. v. Metropolitan 

Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas; On appeal from Cause No. 

1,010,704 in the County Civil Court at Law No. 4 of Harris County, 

Texas

Dear Mr. Prine: 

In accordance with the Court's instruction with respect to the oral 

argument scheduled for Wednesday, October 21, 2015, please be advised 

that the undersigned counsel will be presenting argument on behalf of 

Appellee Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas. 

Very truly yours, 

/s/ Frederick D. Junkin 

Frederick D. Junkin 

Counsel for Appellee 

FDJ:srp 

cc: All parties of record 

ACCEPTED

14-14-00938cv

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

10/14/2015 5:20:04 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 10/14/2015 5:20:04 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
**Exhibit
      13.1**




**CARTHEW
      BAY TECHNOLOGIES INC.**




**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 of Carthew Bay Technologies Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Michael Liik, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




(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 result of operations of the Company.






/s/
                Michael LiikMichael
                LiikPresident
                and Chief Executive OfficerJune
                11, 2007
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17D0158. STEPHEN M. CROOK v. THE STATE.

Stephen M. Crook pled guilty to two counts of statutory rape in October 2015. 

It appears from the application materials that Crook filed a motion for sentence

modification in August 2016.1 The trial court denied the motion, and Crook filed this

application for discretionary review.

Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year

after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal,

whichever is later. See Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 348 (691 SE2d 247)

(2010). The denial of a timely motion to modify under § 17-10-1 (f) may be appealed

directly. See Bowen v. State, 307 Ga. App. 204 (704 SE2d 436) (2010); Anderson v.

State, 290 Ga. App. 890 (660 SE2d 876) (2008); Maldonado v. State, 260 Ga. App.

580 (580 SE2d 330) (2003). It appears that Crook’s motion was timely filed under

§ 17-10-1 (f) within one year of the imposition of his sentence.

Under OCGA § 5-6-35 (j), this Court will grant a timely discretionary

application if the lower court’s order is subject to direct appeal. Accordingly, this

application is hereby GRANTED. Crook shall have ten days from the date of this

order to file a notice of appeal with the superior court, if he has not already done so. 

The clerk of the superior court is DIRECTED to include a copy of this order in the

record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

1 Although Crook has submitted a copy of his motion, bearing a signature date

of August 8, 2016, the copy is not file-stamped. Therefore, it is not clear when the

motion was filed in the superior court.

November 22, 2016
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

11/22/2016
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

In the Interest of K.L.M. and L.M.C., Children

No. 06

- 17

- 00110

- CV Appeal from the County Court at Law of Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 85989 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justic e Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We no te that the appellant s ha ve adequately indicated their inability to pay costs of appeal.
Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED FEBRUARY 21, 2018 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### Vanasdalan v. Gibb-Miller Insurance

*113Before Shughart, *P.J.,*Sheely, *J.,*and Spicer, P.J., 51st Judicial District, Specially Presiding.

*James D. Flower,*for plaintiff.

*Robert P. Reed,*for defendant.

June 25, 1979

SPICER, *P.J., 51st Judicial District, Specially Presiding,*

Plaintiff sued defendant, an insurance agency, for a fire loss occasioned when plaintiffs boat was severely damaged by fire and it was determined no insurance had been procured to cover the loss.

The court, in a non-jury trial, found in favor of defendant and thereafter post-trial motions were filed and have been argued.

This was not a case involving ordinary problems of insurance. Plaintiff had purchased a boat which according to defendant was a poor insurance risk because of its age. Defendant testified he proceeded expeditiously but could not place the insurance by the time of the fire because of the boat’s age. Plaintiff testified he had dealt with defendant for all of his insurance needs in the past and was relying upon defendant in this situation. In this reliance, he assumed that insurance would be placed. He offered no testimony about the availability of insurance from other sources.

*114Plaintiffs contentions, reduced to their simplest essence, are that once defendant agreed to undertake to procure insurance and plaintiff relied upon that agreement, defendant should personally be responsible for the loss.

The trial judge rejected this theory on the basis that some fault must be established whether the form of action is either assumpsit or trespass. We do not disturb this ruling but hold that a new trial must be granted for another reason.

The court found, as a fact, that defendant, after plaintiff had initially inquired about insurance, had responded that there was no problem and that defendant would get back to plaintiff later about the premium. The court also found that defendant had complied with the standards of the insurance business.

Upon review, these two findings cannot be reconciled. In light of the defendant’s initial response, it is apparent that it did not conform to the standards of the insurance profession. The court holds that as a minimum defendant should have promptly notified plaintiff if there was a problem in insurance placement. Defendant did not do this, and therefore did not conform to these standards.

This does not mean that simply because of this defendant would automatically become an insurer in this situation, but it would be defendant’s burden to prove that no loss was occasioned plaintiff because of the breach.

For this reason, the attached order will be entered.

ORDER

And now, June 25, 1979, a new trial is ordered in the above matter.
EXHIBIT      32.1

| 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                  Registrant. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                March 31, 2008 | /s/                Burton Katz         |
|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                | Burton                Katz             |
|                                | Chief                Executive Officer |
|                                |                                   |
|                                |                                   |
| Date:                March 31, 2008 | /s/                Dan Harvey          |
|                                | Dan                Harvey              |
|                                | Chief                Financial Officer |

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DECEMBER
31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA).

</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1,000


<S>                                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                                    JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                      DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                                  7,591
<SECURITIES>                                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                             203
<ALLOWANCES>                                                             (93)
<INVENTORY>                                                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                        7,933
<PP&E>                                                                    584
<DEPRECIATION>                                                          (239)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                          8,484
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                   1,139
<BONDS>                                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                                    7
<OTHER-SE>                                                              7,338
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                            8,484
<SALES>                                                                   350
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                          350
<CGS>                                                                     186
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                           3,986
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                         54
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                       (3,835)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                   (3,835)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                                          (3,835)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                           (.77)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                           (.77)



</TABLE>
Order entered December 6, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-01025-CV

SAMANTHA LOCKETT, Appellant

V.

BACHARY MCGRUDER, Appellee

On Appeal from the 302nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-11935

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this appeal was originally due October 25, 2016. On October 26, 

2016, when the record had not been filed, we directed the court reporter to file the record within 

thirty days. By separate letter, we also informed her that, because appellant’s August 26, 2016 

affidavit of indigency had not been contested, the record, if requested, should be filed without 

prepayment. To date, however, we have not received a response. 

Accordingly, we ORDER court reporter Elizabeth Griffin to file, no later than December 

20, 2016, either (1) the reporter’s record or (2) written verification no hearings were recorded or 

appellant has not requested the record. We notify appellant that if we receive verification the 

reporter’s record has not been requested, we will order the appeal submitted without the 

reporter’s record. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 37.3(c).
We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send copies of this order to (1) the Honorable 

Tena Callahan, Presiding Judge of the 302nd Judicial District Court; (2) Ms. Griffin; and (3) the 

parties.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

Name                                              Jurisdiction of Formation
----                                              -------------------------

NCO Financial Systems, Inc.                       Pennsylvania
NCO Funding, Inc.                                 Delaware
NCO Financial Services, Inc.                      Canada
FCA Funding, Inc.                                 Delaware
NCO Portfolio Management, Inc. *                  Delaware
Compass International Services Corporation        Delaware
NCO Financial Services (UK), Limited              United Kingdom
NCO Financial Systems of Puerto Rico, Inc.        Puerto Rico
JDR Holdings, Inc.                                Delaware
NCO Holdings, Inc.                                Delaware
NCO Customer Management, Inc.                     Pennsylvania
RMH Teleservices Asia Pacific, Inc.               Delaware
RMH Teleservices International, Inc.              Canada
NCOCRM Funding, Inc.                              Delaware
Horsham Aviation LLC                              Delaware
NCO Support Services, LLC                         Delaware


     *Owns 25 subsidiaries operating in the United States engaged in the
ownership of delinquent receivables.

Note: This table does not include any subsidiary that is not required to be
listed pursuant to Item 601 (b) of Regulation S-K.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed May 18, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00798-CV DAVID FLORES, Appellant V. BLANCA FLORES, Appellee On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-17367 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The filing fee and appellants’ brief in this case are overdue. By postcard dated June 20, 2014, we notified appellant the $195 filing fee was due. We cautioned appellant that failure to pay the filing fee would result in dismissal of this appeal. After the clerk’s record was filed, we sent a second fee notice by postcard on Octobe r 24, 2014. We again cautioned appellant that failure to pay the filing fee would result in dismissal of this app eal. By postcard dated March 6, 2015, we notified appellants the time for filing appe llant’s brief had expi red. We directed appellant to file his brief and an extension moti on within ten days. We cautioned appellant that failure to file a brief and an extension motion woul d result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. Thereafter, on March 13, 2015, appella nt filed a motion to extend time to file his brief. That motion was granted and the time to file appellant’s brief was extended until April 3,–2– 2015. We expressly cautioned appellant that failure to file a brief by the deadline might result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not paid the filing fee, filed a brief, filed an extension motion, or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal.
A ccordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b)(c).

140798F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
DAVID FLORES, Appellant
No. 05-14-00798-CV V. BLANCA FLORES, Appellee On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-17367. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee BLANCA FLORES recove r her costs of this appeal from appellant DAVID FLORES.
Judgment entered May 18, 2015.
EX-10.B



 EXHIBIT 10(b) 
 CTS CORPORATION 
 FIRST AMENDMENT 

TO THE 

CTS CORPORATION EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE POLICY 
 This First Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the CTS Corporation Executive Severance Policy (the “Policy”), is adopted by the Board of Directors (the
“Board”) of CTS Corporation, an Indiana corporation (the “Company”), as of March 13, 2013 (the “Board Approval Date”), but will be deemed to be effective as of
September 9, 2012 (the “Amendment Effective Date”), such that the Policy will be considered to have been in full force and effect at all times since September 10, 2009. 

WHEREAS, the Policy was originally effective on September 10, 2009 (“Original Effective Date”), but provided
that it would remain in effect only until three years from its Original Effective Date; 
 WHEREAS, the Policy expired by its
terms on September 10, 2012; 
 WHEREAS, it was the intention of the Board at the time the Policy expired, and it remains
the desire of the Company, that the Policy continue to be effective thereafter in accordance with its original terms; 

WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board and the Company that, as of and after the Amendment Effective Date, the term of the Policy be
perpetual in duration, subject to amendment and termination of the Policy pursuant to the provisions of Section I of the Policy; and 
 WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board and the Company that the Policy be deemed to have been in full force and effect at all times from the Original Effective Date. 

NOW, THEREFORE, as of the Board Approval Date, and effective as of the Amendment Effective Date, the Board hereby reinstates and amends
the Policy as follows: 
 1. Amendment to Section I of the Policy. The last sentence of Section I of the Policy is hereby
amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 
 “This policy will remain in effect until terminated or amended by
CTS’ Board. CTS’ Board may terminate or amend this policy at any time (provided that such termination will not adversely affect any Severance Benefits to which an Executive has already become entitled prior to the date of such policy
termination), and this policy shall be considered to have been in full force and effect at all times since its effective date until such time as terminated in accordance with this Section I.” 

2. Miscellaneous. Except as amended by this Amendment, the Policy shall remain in full force and effect. 








					
	ISSUED AND APPROVED BY:	 		 	
			
	 /s/ Scott A. Bowmar
	 		 	
	Scott A. Bowmar	 		 	
	Vice President, Human Resources	 		 	
			
	 /s/ Kieran O’Sullivan
	 		 	 /s/ Patricia K. Collawn

	Kieran O’Sullivan	 		 	Patricia K. Collawn
	President and Chief Executive Officer	 		 	Chairperson
		 		 	CTS Corporation
		 		 	Compensation Committee


  
 2
EXHIBIT24.2

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESEPRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints each ofDamien M. Sullivan, Ross G. Landsbaum and Barry F. Schwartz or any ofthem, each acting alone, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact andagent, with full power of substitution, for him and in his name, placeand stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with thePANAVISION INC. (the "Corporation")Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 underthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including, withoutlimiting the generality of the foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in thename and on behalf of the Corporation or on behalf of the undersignedas a director or officer of the Corporation, and any amendments to theForm 10-K and any instrument, contract, document or other writing, ofor in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments thereto, and to filethe same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connectiontherewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities andExchange Commission and any applicable securities exchange orsecurities self-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in-factand agents, each acting alone, full power and authority to do andperform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be donein and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as hemight or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all thatsaid attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substituteor substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtuehereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed thesepresents this 30th day of March, 2006.

|  | /S/ ROBERT L. BEITCHER                ROBERT L.BEITCHER |
|--|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

BADI BURGOS

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 15

- 160

[ July 27, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Jeffrey R. Levenson , Judge; L.T. Case No. 10

- 9319CF10A

.

James S. Lewis, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman,

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, M AY and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
    
    The Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78m or 78o(d)); and
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Michael K. RobinsonMichael K. RobinsonChief Executive Officer,
President and Assistant Treasurer