alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jerry RIDGEWAY, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1812

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

SEPTEMBER 19, 2017

Upon this Court's own motion, this appeal is hereby dismissed as moot. *See**Ridgeway v. State*, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1688 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 2, 2017).

ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SUAREZ and SALTER, JJ., concur.
#### Garco *v.*Hanks.

4-8759

218 S. W. 2d 378

Opinion delivered March 21, 1949.

*883
      *Augustus G. Bemmel, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Y. W. Etheridge,*for appellee.

Fraste G-. Smith, J.

This is a suit for damages for the alleged breach of a contract. On February 12, 1947, the plaintiff, doing business as Garco, entered into a written contract with defendant Hanks whereby the plaintiff was to construct four prefabricated log cabins at Hank’s Bluff, Lake Norfork, near Mountain Home. The relevant provisions of the contract which was in writing, read as follows:

> *‘ ‘*The Contractor, in consideration of the actual cost plus 20% to be paid him by the owner as hereinafter set out, agrees to erect, build and construct for said owner, in a good and workmanlike manner according to the plans and specifications hereinafter referred to, Item 1— 4 each cabins, log, 16' x 28', Item 2 — assistance, advice, and supervision, upon the following described land in Baxter County, Arkansas, to-wit: Hank’s Bluff.”

It was further recited that, “The contractor shall furnish, at his own expense, all' labor and materials necessary and used in the construction of said buildings” conforming to the plans and specifications mentioned in the contract, and that the contractor should complete and finish the buildings “and deliver the completed project to the owner on or before the -15th day of March, 1947.”

No point is made that the cabins were not constructed within the time limit, as there were delays for which the contractor was not responsible. The contract was amended and added to and a fifth cabin was contracted for. It is undisputed that the owner paid freight and hauling charges on material which Garco should have paid, and it is clearly established, if not undisputed, that the owner completed the buildings, indeed according to the testimony on the owner’s behalf, the buildings were not fully completed at the time of the trial.

*884The principal question in the case is the one of fact, whether the contract had been canceled by consent. That it was is affirmed by the owner and denied by the contractor.

The jury had the right to find upon conflicting testimony that the contract had been canceled and that, if so, Gareo had been paid for all work done or materials furnished, less the 20% which would have been due had the contract been performed. That there was a breach of the contract is undisputed, and the verdict of the jury reflects the finding that it had been canceled after its breach by G-arco, and the judgment rendered upon this verdict in favor of the owner must be affirmed and it is so ordered.
Exhibit 12.1




Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges


and Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges


and Preferred Share Dividends




The following table sets forth our ratios of earnings to fixed charges and earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred share dividends for the periods indicated.  The ratio of earnings to fixed charges was computed by dividing earnings by our fixed charges. The ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred share dividends was computed by dividing earnings by our combined fixed charges and preferred share dividends.  For purposes of calculating these ratios, earnings consist of income from continuing operations before noncontrolling interests plus fixed charges.  Fixed charges consist of interest charges on all indebtedness, whether expensed or capitalized, the interest component of rental expense and the amortization of debt discounts and issue costs, whether expensed or capitalized.  Preferred share dividends consist of dividends on our Series A preferred shares.




Fiscal Year ended April 30,2010
2009
2008
2007
2006Consolidated ratio of earnings to fixed charges
1.06x
1.14x
1.23x
1.24x
1.21xConsolidated ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred share dividends
1.02x
1.10x
1.19x
1.19x
1.16x
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

SKYLAND DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC
, Appellant,

v.

FTL PROPERTY, LLC
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 1706

[ March 10, 2022 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; William W. Haury, Jr. , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE

19

- 16579 (18)

.

Keith D. Silverstein of Keith D. Silverstein, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Terrence P. O ’ Connor of Morgan

, Carratt & O’Connor, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

P ER C URIA M

.

Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN

, F ORST and A RTAU

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Union County vs. Cowser.

A collector is entitled to commissions only when lie collects the taxes; and i'f- he fails to take the tax book, and it is delivered to his successor, he has no claim for commission on the taxes collected ‘by his successor.

*Appeal from Union Ci/rcuit Court.*

Hon. Len B. Green, Circuit Judge.

Caeleton, for the appellant.

*52Mr. Justice Faieciiild

delivered the opihion of the court.

At the August election of 1858, Robert Sewell was elected sheriff of Union county, as successor to Cowser, the former sheriff. In October, 1858, the latter gave his receipt for the tax book of that year, but did not remove it from the clerk’s office, and did not collect any of the taxes. In January, 1859, Sewell having in the meantime qualified as sheriff, was also required to give bond as collector of the taxes for 1858, and the tax book was given to him by the clerk under the direction of the county court. Sowell collected the taxes and made his settlement with the county court, whereupon Cowser filed an account against Union county, claiming that ho was entitled to commissions on the amount collected by Sewell as if he had collected it himself, he being the lawful collector of the taxes for 1858. The claim of Cowser was disallowed by the county court: he appealed to the circuit court, which reversed the judgment of the county court, tried the case knew, and rendered a judgment for Cowser. The county appealed to this court.

The law gives commissions only for the collection of taxes. Cowser did not collect the taxes of 1858, and he had no demand against the county as pay for services he did not perform. Whether Cowser or Sewell was entitled to the tax book of 1858, and, consequent upon the actual collection of the taxes, which of them should have received the pay allowed by the law for such collection, are not questions before this court.

The county court properly rejected the claim of Cowser: the circuit court improperly set aside its rejection, and the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause is remanded, with directions to affirm the judgment of the county court.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 21


                            SIGNIFICANT  SUBSIDIARIES



SUBSIDIARY NAME                                                   JURISDICTION

Canrig Drilling Technology Ltd.                                   Delaware
Epoch Well Logging, Inc.                                          California
Loffland Brothers de Venezuela, C.A.                              Venezuela
Nabors Alaska Drilling, Inc.                                      Alaska
Nabors Corporate Services, Inc.                                   Delaware
Nabors Drilling International Limited                             Delaware
Nabors Drilling Limited                                           Canada
Nabors Drilling USA, Inc.                                         Delaware
Nabors International, Inc.                                        Delaware
Nabors Offshore Drilling, Inc.                                    Delaware
Peak Oilfield Services Company (50% ownership)                    Akaska
Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.                                 Nevada
#### A. F. HOUSE, Trustee *v.*James SCOTT, d/b/a Scott Lumber Company et al

5-4556

429 S. W. 2d 62

Opinion delivered May 27, 1968

[Rehearing denied July 15, 1968.]

*James L. Sloan*and *Stanley E. Price,*for appellants.

*Tanner*& *Wallace,*for appellees.

*Terral, Rawlings, Matthews*& *Purtle,*for appellees and cross-appellant.

Conley Byrd, Justice.

This is a companion case to *House*v. *Scott,*244 Ark. 1075, *infra.*The amounts and the parties are not wholly identical hut the issues are identical except for the point raised on cross appeal by Choctaw Plumbing Company, Inc., that the court erred in not awarding it judgment against Modern American Mortgage Corporation and A. F. House, Trustee, for the amount of its lien.

"We find Choctaw’s contention to be without merit because it had a contract only with Stillman. Its sole remedy under the mechanics’ lien statute is for a lien upon the fixtures and the premises to the extent therein allowed.

There is no evidence here that Modern American and A. F. House, Trustee, were in any way connected *1088with Stiliman’s business other than in their capacity as mortgagees.

Therefore, so much of the trial court’s judgment as required A. F. House, Trustee, to pay into the registry of the court the unexpended funds and that portion which gave the mortgagee priority as to the $1,700 paid to Modern American for the release of the Olsen mortgage is hereby reversed.

Reversed and remanded.

FoglemaN, J., dissents.

Joi-iN A. FoglemaN, Justice,

dissenting. I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in *A. F. House, Trustee*v. *James S. Scott, d/b/a Scott Lumber Company et al,*No. 5-4555, 244 Ark. 1075, 429 S. W. 2d 108. I would reverse on appeal and affirm on cross-appeal.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No s

. 36944 & 36945 & 36946

STATE OF IDAHO
,

Plaintiff-Respondent
,

v.

JACOB WAYNE JUDD
,

Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2010 Unpublished Opinion No. 480

Filed: May 25, 2010

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
OPINION AND SHALL NOT
BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Deborah A. Bail , District Judge.

Judgment s of conviction and concurrent, unified sentence s of ten years, with three

years determinate for burglary, rape , and grand theft

, affirmed

.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Stephen D. Thompson, Special Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Ketchum

, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasd en, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________

Before LANSING, Chief Judge, GUTIERREZ, Judge

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

In these consolidated cases, Jacob W ayne Judd was convicted of burglary, Idaho Code

§ 18

- 1401, rape, I.C. § 18

- 6101(1), and grand theft, I.C. § § 18

- 2403(1), 18

- 2407(1)(b). T he

district court imposed concurrent unified sentence s of ten years, with three years determinate in

ea ch case

. Judd appeals, contending that the sentence s are excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of a sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114 , 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing2

the length of a sentence, we consider th e defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Judd ’s judgment s of conviction and sentence s are affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                            5
<MULTIPLIER>                     1,000
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    6-MOS                             
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1998          
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1998          
<CASH>                          42,040               
<SECURITIES>                    31,007               
<RECEIVABLES>                  147,693              
<ALLOWANCES>                      6,463                
<INVENTORY>                          0                
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     0                
<PP&E>                               0                   
<DEPRECIATION>                       0                   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 233,681             
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                0             
<BONDS>                        105,056              
<COMMON>                            66                  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0                  
<PREFERRED>                          0                  
<OTHER-SE>                      73,948               
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   233,681             
<SALES>                              0                    
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  9,973            
<CGS>                                0                    
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        0                    
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     0                    
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   460                 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               3,695                
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  3,755                
<INCOME-TAX>                     1,446                
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              2,309                
<DISCONTINUED>                       0                    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0                   
<CHANGES>                            0                    
<NET-INCOME>                     2,309                
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      .40                  
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .38                  
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99
                                Selected Information
                    Relating to Series 1992-1, Series 1992-2,Series 
                 1994-1 Certificates, Series 1995-1 Certificates, Series 
                 1996-1 Certificates and Series 1996-2 Certificates from 
                         January 1, 1997 through March 31, 1997
                        ----------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

            Series 1992-1   Series 1992-2   Series 1994-1    Series 1995-1    Series 1996-1    Series 1996-2  
            6 7/8% Auto     7 3/8% Auto     Floating Rate    6.50% Auto       5.50% Auto       Floating Rate
            Loan Asset      Loan Asset       Loan Asset       Loan Asset       Loan Asset      Loan Asset 
            Backed          Backed           Backed           Backed           Backed          Backed
            Certificates    Certificates     Certificates     Certificates     Certificates    Certificates
            ------------    ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------    ------------



<S>        <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>


Interest
Paid       $  5,729,166.67  $ 12,906,249.99  $ 14,557,708.31  $ 17,949,652.79  $ 10,718,055.57  $ 13,682,666.66

Servicing
Fee Paid   $    333,333.33  $  1,400,000.00  $  2,499,999.99  $  2,499,999.99  $  2,000,000.01  $  2,400,000.00








</TABLE>

                                    -16-
EX PARTE Redius WORTHY

CR-15-1325

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
EX PARTE J.D.L

CR-16-0283

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 25, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Geneva Cir. Ct.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1213 

To require elementary schools and secondary schools to provide an option 

for safe, in-person attendance during school years 2020–2021 and 2021– 

2022. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 23, 2021 

Mr. ALLEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To require elementary schools and secondary schools to provide an option for safe, in-person attendance during 

school years 2020–2021 and 2021–2022. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Educational Flexibility 

5 for Families Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR SAFE, IN-PERSON ATTENDANCE 

7 OPTION. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Beginning on the date of enact9 ment of this Act, no amounts are authorized to be approVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:49 Mar 21, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1213.IH H1213

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1213 IH

1 priated for school years 2020–2021 and 2021–2022 to any 

2 elementary school or secondary school, or any local edu3 cational agency or State educational agency that serves 

4 an elementary school or secondary school, that does not 

5 provide an option for students to attend classes, safely and 

6 in-person, at the school during such school year. 

7 (b) DEFINITIONS.—The terms ‘‘elementary school’’, 

8 ‘‘secondary school’’, ‘‘local educational agency’’, and 

9 ‘‘State educational agency’’ have the meanings given the 

10 terms in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary 

11 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                               SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, C. Christian Winkle, President and Chief Executive Officer of Mariner Health
Care, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. section 1350, that:

(1)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
         period ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the
         requirements of sections 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
         the Company.

Date: May 12, 2003



/s/ C. Christian Winkle
----------------------------------
C. Christian Winkle
President and
Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive 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
  
    
    the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 25, 2007
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
    
    the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
  /s/ Jack H. Brown
 /s/ Phillip J. Smith
EX PARTE James ROBINSON

CR-16-0246

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 25, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
II 

Calendar No. 340 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1218 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 6, 2022 

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar 

AN ACT 

To require the Federal Communications Commission to incorporate data on maternal health outcomes into its 

broadband health maps. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Data Mapping to Save 

5 Moms’ Lives Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MAPPING BROADBAND CONNECTIVITY AND MATER7 NAL HEALTH OUTCOMES. 

8 (a) INCORPORATION OF MATERNAL MORTALITY AND

9 SEVERE MATERNAL MORBIDITY DATA.—Not later than 

10 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1218 PCS

1 Federal Communications Commission shall incorporate 

2 publicly available data on maternal mortality and severe 

3 maternal morbidity, including for not less than 1 year 

4 postpartum, into the Mapping Broadband Health in 

5 America platform of the Commission. 

6 (b) CONSULTATION WITH CDC.—The Federal Com7 munications Commission shall consult with the Director 

8 of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention regard9 ing the maternal mortality and severe maternal morbidity 

10 data that should be incorporated under subsection (a). 

Passed the House of Representatives April 5, 2022. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 340 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1218 

AN ACT 

To require the Federal Communications Commiscomes into its broadband health maps. sion to incorporate data on maternal health outAPRIL 6, 2022 

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Case 1:00-cr-00094-HJW     Document 162      Filed 01/08/2008     Page 1 of 6

Case 1:00-cr-00094-HJW     Document 162      Filed 01/08/2008     Page 2 of 6

Case 1:00-cr-00094-HJW     Document 162      Filed 01/08/2008     Page 3 of 6

Case 1:00-cr-00094-HJW     Document 162      Filed 01/08/2008     Page 4 of 6

Case 1:00-cr-00094-HJW     Document 162      Filed 01/08/2008     Page 5 of 6

Case 1:00-cr-00094-HJW     Document 162      Filed 01/08/2008     Page 6 of 6
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
                                 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS        
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  MAY-21-1999              
<PERIOD-START>                     DEC-01-1999            
<PERIOD-END>                       FEB-28-1999           
<CASH>                                  1,905       
<SECURITIES>                                0   
<RECEIVABLES>                         170,685         
<ALLOWANCES>                          (30,080)         
<INVENTORY>                           236,624         
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      421,651       
<PP&E>                                418,595         
<DEPRECIATION>                       (283,725)          
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     33,788,451           
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 814,618        
<BONDS>                                     0   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0   
<PREFERRED>                             1,143       
<COMMON>                              465,892        
<OTHER-SE>                         25,012,618            
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       33,788,451            
<SALES>                               759,586        
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      759,586         
<CGS>                                 459,376         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         459,376        
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    2,487,459           
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    181,226       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    (2,368,475)         
<INCOME-TAX>                                0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (2,368,475)           
<DISCONTINUED>                              0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0 
<CHANGES>                                   0  
<NET-INCOME>                       (2,368,475)           
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           (0.30)    
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (0.30)      
        


</TABLE>