alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Anderson v. Commonwealth.

(Decided April 10, 1911.)

1. Under section 2557b, subsection 2, Ky. St., the defendant may be punished if he has in his possession spirituous, vinous or malt liquors in local option territory for the purpose of selling them.

2. An attested copy of the record on the collector’s book showing that the defendant has paid the tax as a retailer of spirituous, vinous and malt liquors required by the laws of the United States, may be put in evidence to show that the defendant has a license from the United States. (See original opinion Anderson v. Com., 142 Ky. 446.)

ZERFOSS & WEAKLEY for appellant.

JAMES BREATHITT, Attorney General, and TOM B. McGREGOR, Assistant Attorney General.

RespoNse by

Judge Nunn

to Petition for Rehearing.

Section 2557b, sub-section 2, of the Kentucky, Statutes, provides:

> *88“It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, lend, give, procure for, or furnish to another, any spirituous, vinous or malt liquors, or to have in his possession spirituous, vinous or malt liquors, for the purpose of selling them in any territory where said act is in force, and any person so offending shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars, and imprisoned not less than ten nor more than fifty days.

> “The possession of a United States special tax stamp (commonly called United States license) for carrying on the business of a retail dealer in spirituous, vinous or malt liquors, or the having of such tax stamp or license stuck up at the place of business' in such territory shall be *prima facie*evidence of guilt under this section. ’ ’

Under this section the person who has in his possession spirituous, vinous or malt liquors for the purpose of selling them in any territory where the local option act is in force may be fined not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars and imprisoned not less than ten nor more than fifty days. (McGuire v. Commonmonwealth, 30 Ky. L. R., 720; Sizemore v. Commonwealth, 140 Ky., 338.)

In such prosecutions, a certified copy of the collector’s book showing that the defendant has paid the tax required by the laws of the United States for carrying on the business of a retail dealer in spirituous, vinous and malt liquors is competent evidence under section 1636 of the Kentucky Statutes, which provides as follows:

> “All records and exemplifications of office books kept in any public office of the United States, or of a sister State, not appertaining to a court, shall be evidence in this State if attested by the keeper of such record or books, and the seal of his office, if there be a seal.”

Petition for rehearing overruled.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, David S. Gartner, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form
10-K/A of Metropolitan Health Networks, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this annual report does 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 annual report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in
this annual report:4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:  a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being
prepared;b)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in
this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
this annual report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the registrants fourth fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting;;  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the Audit Committee of
registrants Board of Directors:  a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses
in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting. DATE:
July 28, 2004 /s/ David S. GartnerDavid S. GartnerChief Financial Officer
(March *5,*1908.)

#### FARMERS’ CO-OPERATIVE DITCH COMPANY, a Corporation, Respondent, v. RIVERSIDE IRRIGATION DISTRICT, LTD., et al., Defendants and Respondents; PIONEER IRRIGATION DISTRICT, Defendant and Appellant.

[94 Pac. 764.]

APPEAL from tbe District Court of the Third Judicial District for the County of Ada. Hon. George H. Stewart, Judge.

Action by the plaintiff to have the rights and priorities of the appropriates of water from the Boise river determined and decreed. Cause tried and decree entered for the several claimants. Defendant, the Pioneer Irrigation District, appealed from the judgment.

*Affirmed.*

W. E. Borah, and J. J. Blake, for Appellant.

J. C. Rice, Frank Martin, F. J. Smith, Silas Moody, Karl Paine, Walter Griffiths, Smith & Scatterday, S. H. Hays, Ira E. Barber, H. E. Wallace, W. A. Stone, and J. L. Niday, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal by .the Pioneer Irrigation District is taken in the same ease and from the judgment that has been considered in *Farmers’ Co-operative Ditch Company v. Riverside Irrigation District et al.,*Respondents, and *Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District,*Appellant, just decided by this court, *ante,*p. 450, 94 Pac. 761. The same questions are involved in this appeal as on that, and upon the authority of that case the judgment from which this appeal is taken will be affirmed. Costs awarded in favor of respondents.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>                         0001030451
<NAME>                        Anchor Holdings, Inc.
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           6,914
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,474
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (900)
<INVENTORY>                                     23,292
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                49,287
<PP&E>                                          97,814
<DEPRECIATION>                                (48,343)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 120,839
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,392
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,849)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   120,839
<SALES>                                        161,161
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                          135,974
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,677
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (287)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,165
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,632
<INCOME-TAX>                                       794
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                838
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,210)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (372)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

      I, Kenny D. Neal, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of First McMinnville Corporation;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects,
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

      (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
      disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
      to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
      its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
      prepared;

      (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
      and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
      the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
      control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
      most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
      likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting; and

      5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors:

      (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.

November 12, 2004

/s/ Kenny D. Neal
---------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton,* Lacy, Hassell, Keenan, Koontz, 

and Kinser, JJ. 

NATIONAL FRUIT PRODUCT 

COMPANY, INC., ET AL. 

 PER CURIAM 

v. Record No. 990428 March 3, 2000 

BRENDA STATON 

FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

 We awarded this appeal to review a judgment of the Court of 

Appeals in National Fruit Product Co. v. Staton, 28 Va. App. 

650, 507 S.E.2d 667 (1998), a workers' compensation case 

involving carpal tunnel syndrome. 

 The appeal was limited to the consideration of one 

assignment of error. The issue considered is whether the Court 

of Appeals erred in determining that "high probability" is 

equivalent to "clear and convincing evidence (not a mere 

probability)" within the context of Code § 65.2-401. That 

statute sets forth the elements required to prove a compensable 

ordinary disease of life. 

 For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the Court of 

Appeals, we will affirm the court's judgment. 

Affirmed. 

 

*

Justice Compton participated in the hearing and decision of this 

case prior to the effective date of his retirement on 

February 2, 2000.
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 21.1

                      LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

THE MAJOR AUTOMOTIVE COMPANIES, INC.

         Major Acquisition Corp.

                Major Automotive Group, Inc.
                Major Chevrolet, Inc.
                Major Chrysler Plymouth Jeep Eagle, Inc.
                Major Dodge, Inc.
                Major Subaru, Inc.
                Major Kia, Inc.

        Major Automotive of New Jersey, Inc.
                Compass Lincoln-Mercury, Inc.
                Compass Dodge, Inc.

        Major Orange Properties, LLC

        Major Automotive Realty Corp.

        Hempstead Mazda, Inc.

        Major Nissan, Inc.

        Major Daewoo, Inc.

        Mid-Atlantic Telecommunications, Inc.

        Major Fleet & Leasing Corp.
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appe llate Distri ct of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________ No. 02

- 22

- 00130

- CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 231st District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 231

- 700012

- 21
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Wallach and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walk er 

### I N THE 

### I NTEREST OF 

### T.B., A 

### C HILD2 MEMORAND UM OPINION
Father appeals fro m the trial court’s judgment terminating his parental rights to his child on the grounds that Father had constructively abandoned the child , h ad not regularly v

isited or m aintained significant contact with the child , ha d demonstrated an inability to provide the child with a safe environment , and had failed to comply with
his court

- ordered service plan ; the Department ha d made reasonable efforts to return
the child to the fath er ; and that termination was in the chi ld’ s be st in terest. 1 See Tex.
Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b)(1) (N) , (O) , (b)(2)

. We affirm. Father’s appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief stating that the appeal
is frivolous and wholly without merit

. Se e Anders v. California , 38 6 U.S. 738, 74 4,
87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967) ; see also In re K.M. , 98 S .W.3d 774, 776

– 77 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 2003, no pet.) (holding that Anders procedures apply in cases terminating parental rights). The brief meets the Anders requirements by presentin g a profession al evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there a re no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. Further, Father’s counsel (1) provided Father with a copy of the
Anders brief, (2) informed Father of his rig hts to file a pro se respo nse and to see k
d iscretionary review from the Supreme Court , and (3) ad vised Father of his right to access the appellate record and provided to him a form motion for effectuating that
purpose. See Kelly v. S tate , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)

. Father

1 The child’s Mother is d eceased and not a party to this appeal

.3

d id not file a response, and the Texas Departme nt of Famil y and Protective Services
declined to file a brief.
When an Anders brief is filed, we must independently examine the record to
determine if any arguable ground s for appeal exist. In re C.J. , 501 S.W .3d 254, 255 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 2016, pets. denied)

. Our examination should consider the record, the briefs, and any pro se response. In re L.B. , No. 02

- 19

- 00407

- CV, 20 20 WL 1809505, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth Apr. 9, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.)

. A fter ca reful review, we agree with Father’s counse l that ther e are no arguable grounds for appeal in this case. We affirm the trial court’s judgment terminating Father’s parent al rights. Father’s counsel remains appoin ted in this case through any proceedings in the Supreme Court unless otherwise relieve d of these duties. See In re
P.M. , 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 (Tex. 2016)

.
/s/ Brian Walker
Br ian Walker J ustice
Delivered: October 6, 2022
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                         INTERNATIONAL COMPUTEX, INC.

                STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

                                                        YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,

                                                             1997        1996
Primary and fully diluted:

Weighted average common stock outstanding                  2,875,460   2,125,000
Common stock equivalents (modified treasury stock method)    225,438     162,855
                                                          ----------  ----------

Total weighted average and common equivalent
shares outstanding                                         3,100,898   2,287,855
                                                          ==========  ==========

Net income/(loss)                                         $  710,660  $1,134,384
                                                          ==========  ==========

Net income/(loss) per share                               $     0.23  $     0.50





                                       1
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBAENES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of American Fiber Green Products, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the
year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to such officers knowledge: Section 13(a)



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of Section 15 (d) of the Securities and 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 as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the following
persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.



|                                      |  |                                                          |  |               
|------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------
|Signatures                            |  | Title                                                    |  | Date          
|                                      |  |                                                         
|/s/ Daniel L. Hefner Daniel L.
Hefner |  | President & Director (Principal Executive Officer)       |  | April 16, 2007
|                                      |  |                                                         
|/s/ Michael A. Freid Michael A.
Freid |  | Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer |  | April 16, 2007
| 1. | Such Quarter Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, 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 such      Quarter Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      LATTENO FOOD      CORP. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:        November 19, 2010       |
|------------------------------------------------|
|                                           |
| /s/ Daniel      Ollech                         |
| Daniel      OllechChief      Executive Officer |

----
EXHIBIT 32.2

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


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Omega Ventures Group, Inc.
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, John R. Rask, Principal Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

          (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.



Date: August 14, 2006         /S/ John R. Rask
                              -------------------------------------------
                              John R. Rask, Principal Financial Officer