alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion issued January 12, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-16-00302-CV

———————————

JAMES SCARBOROUGH AND PHILLIP PAUL BRYANT, Appellants

V.

CITY OF HOUSTON AND ANNISE D. PARKER, Appellees

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2015-69353

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, James Scarborough and Phillip Paul Bryant, have filed a petition 

for permissive appeal seeking to challenge interlocutory orders denying their 

traditional motions for summary judgment. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE 

ANN. § 51.014(d) (West Supp. 2015); TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3. 
2

To be entitled to a permissive appeal from an interlocutory order that would 

not otherwise be appealable, the requesting party must establish that (1) the order 

to be appealed involves “a controlling question of law as to which there is 

substantial ground for difference of opinion” and (2) an immediate appeal from the 

order “may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” TEX. CIV.

PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3(e)(4); TEX. R. CIV.

P. 168 (“Permission [to pursue a permissive appeal] must be stated in the order to 

be appealed . . . [and] must identify the controlling question of law as to which 

there is a substantial ground for different of opinion and must state why an 

immediate appeal may materially advance the ultimate termination of the 

litigation.”). 

The petition fails to meet these requirements because, among other 

problems, the order appealed from does not identify the controlling question of law 

or state why an immediate appeal may materially advance the ultimate termination 

of the litigation. See TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3(e)(4); TEX. R. CIV. P. 168. Accordingly, 

we deny the petition for permissive appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Brown.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-4039

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MANUEL POPOCA-ANSELMO,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (CR-03-37-F)

Submitted: September 3, 2004 Decided: October 6, 2004

Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,

Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M.

Hayes, Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorneys,

Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Manuel Popoca-Anselmo appeals his conviction for illegal

reentry into the United States following deportation, in violation

of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a), (b)(2) (2000).

Popoca-Anselmo’s sole contention on appeal is that the

district court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the

defense of duress. Popoca-Anselmo asserts that he returned to this

country, albeit without permission, to avoid death threats made

against him in his native country of Mexico. This court reviews de

novo a district court's decision not to instruct a jury on a

defendant's theory of a case. United States v. Singh, 54 F.3d

1182, 1189 (4th Cir. 1995). Where there is insufficient evidence,

as a matter of law, to support an element of the affirmative

defense, the defendant can be precluded from presenting any

evidence of duress to the jury. United States v. Sarno, 24 F.3d

618, 621 (4th Cir. 1994). 

In order to establish a claim of duress, the defendant

must show that: (1) he acted under an immediate threat of serious

bodily injury; (2) he had a well-grounded belief that the threat

would be carried out; and (3) he had no reasonable opportunity to

avoid violating the law and the threatened harm. United States v.

Bailey, 444 U.S. 394, 410-15 (1980); United States v. King, 879

F.2d 137, 138-39 (4th Cir. 1989). A defendant has the burden of
- 3 -

establishing sufficient evidence of all three elements of the

defense. Bailey, 444 U.S. at 415; Tanner, 941 F.2d at 588. 

After careful review of the record, we conclude, as the

district court found, that Popoca-Anselmo did not avail himself of

reasonable opportunities to avoid violating the law and the

threatened harm. Bailey, 444 U.S. at 410-15. Accordingly, we find

that Popoca-Anselmo has not met his burden, and the district court

properly refused to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of

duress. Id.; Singh, 54 F.3d at 1189. We therefore affirm PopocaAnselmo’s conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual Balance 

in 75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Ann

Balan

75th 

-1.92% -5.70% 0.62% 0.76% -1.30% -4.9

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2005 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actu

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Retirement Age

Proposed Provision: Eliminate the hiatus in the normal retirement age (speed up the increase and then increase the NRA 2 months per year until the NRA reaches age 68

January 4, 2006

Present Law Change From Present Law in Results with this prov

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

0.005.00

10.0015.0020.0025.00

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075

Year

Percent

Cost rates with this provisionCost rates under present lawIncome rates with this provisionIncome rates under present law

OASDI tax rate schedule 

(employees and employers, each)

1993 and later 6.2%

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditu

0

100200300400500600700800900

1000

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 205

Year

Percent

Present law with thi
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3449 

To require foreign establishments engaged in the manufacture, preparation, 

propagation, compounding, or processing of a drug or device to register 

with the Food and Drug Administration regardless of whether the drug 

or device undergoes further manufacture, preparation, propagation, 

compounding, or processing at a separate establishment outside the 

United States prior to being imported into the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 10, 2022 

Mr. PETERS (for himself and Ms. COLLINS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To require foreign establishments engaged in the manufacture, preparation, propagation, compounding, or processing of a drug or device to register with the Food 

and Drug Administration regardless of whether the drug 

or device undergoes further manufacture, preparation, 

propagation, compounding, or processing at a separate 

establishment outside the United States prior to being 

imported into the United States. 

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


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3449 IS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Registration of Certain 

3 Foreign Establishments Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN FOREIGN ESTABLISH5 MENTS. 

6 (a) REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN FOREIGN ESTAB7 LISHMENTS.—Section 510(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, 

8 and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360(i)) is amended by add9 ing at the end the following: 

10 ‘‘(5) The requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) 

11 shall apply regardless of whether the drug or device under12 goes further manufacture, preparation, propagation, 

13 compounding, or processing at a separate establishment 

14 outside the United States prior to being imported or of15 fered for import into the United States.’’. 

16 (b) UPDATING REGULATIONS.—Not later than 2 

17 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec18 retary of Health and Human Services shall update regula19 tions, as appropriate, to implement the amendment made 

20 by subsection (a). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
1

 Don H. Reavis, Justice (Ret.), was on the panel that heard oral argument. He did

not participate in the decision. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.1(b). 

NO. 07-04-0428-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

DECEMBER 28, 2006

______________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF C.H., C.H. AND C.H., CHILDREN

_______________________________

FROM THE 140TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY

NO. 2002-518,450; HONORABLE JIM BOB DARNELL, JUDGE

_________________________________

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.1

CONCURRING OPINION

I concur with the result of the majority opinion. However, my concurrence is the

result of the failure of McCann to either claim surprise at the time the trial court made its

initial ruling to allow the testimony in question or to request a continuance to investigate the

information developed in the late filed discovery. See TEX.R.CIV.P. 193.6(a)(2), 193.6(c).

Without the requisite claims by McCann, I cannot find that the trial court abused its

discretion in allowing the testimony. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. v. Malone, 972

S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tex. 1998). 
2

However, this case is a perfect example of the effect of allowing the exception to the

rule of full disclosure, as required by Rule 193, to become the norm by not enforcing the

language of the rule. TEX. R. CIV. P. 193. In discussing the precursor to Rule 193, Justice

Hecht stated, “To relax the good cause standard in Rule 215(5) would impair its purpose.

Counsel should not be excused from the requirements of the rule without a strict showing

of good cause.” Alvarado v. Farah Mfg. Co., Inc., 830 S.W.2d 911, 915 (Tex. 1992). An

attorney simply stating the fault was all mine does not address the requirements of the rule.

However, the remedy, exclusion of the evidence, more especially in a child custody case

where the “best interest of the children” is paramount, was something the trial court was

not willing to do. As I stated at the outset, I concur with the majority, but only because the

action taken by McCann did nothing to assist the trial judge in addressing the remedy, for

the failure to file answers to discovery, except by exclusion of the evidence. 

Mackey K. Hancock

 Justice
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 8 ,

2011

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________
NO. 14

- 1 0

- 0 1141

- CV

____________ DAWN JOHNSON WHATLEY, Individually and as the Executrix of the Estate of

Perry Lee Whatley, and MICHAEL EASTON, Appellant s

V.

MYLUS JAMES WALKER, JR., Appellee

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 355,095



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from an order approving the Guardian’s Final Accounting signed October 6, 2010. On October 27, 2011, appellants filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal because the case has been settled. Se e Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Anderson and McCally.
#### FOREMAN-BLADES LUMBER COMPANY v. TUNIS HEADING AND STAVE COMPANY.

(Filed 12 September, 1928.)

Venue — Nature or Subject of Action.

An action for wrongful conversion of severed timber is not removable as a matter of right to the county in which the land from which the trees were severed is situated.

*39Appeal by defendant from *Barnhill, J.,*at March Term, 1928, of PASQUOTANK.

*W. D. Boone for appellant.*

*McMullan, & LeBoy for appellee.*

Per Curiam.

As we interpret the amended complaint the alleged cause of action is the wrongful conversion of timber, situated on land in Gates County, after the trees had been cut and sawed into lumber. In apt time the defendant made a motion to change the place of trial from Pasquotank to Gates. C. S., 470; *Dixon v. Haar,*158 N. C., 341. The motion was denied, and the defendant excepted and appealed. The judgment denying the motion is free from error. *Cedar Works v. Lumber Co.,*161 N. C., 604. Judgment

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,075
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,038
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (127)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,292
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,489
<PP&E>                                           2,981
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (980)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,682
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,923
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,922
<OTHER-SE>                                    (13,284)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,682
<SALES>                                         12,889
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,889
<CGS>                                            8,578
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,578
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,571
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 512
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (772)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (772)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (772)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

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



In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  of  Nittany  Financial  Corp.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "report"),  we, David
Z. Richards, President, and Gary M. Bradley, Vice President and Chief Accounting
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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 results of operations of the
Company.




/s/ David Z. Richards                /s/ Gary M. Bradley
-------------------------------      -------------------------------------------
David Z. Richards                    Gary M. Bradley
President and CEO                    Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer



May 13, 2005




A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Nittany  Financial  Corp. and will be retained by Nittany  Financial
Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 3.3(a)

                               AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO
                           AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS
                             OF PTEK HOLDINGS, INC.
                           (EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2001)

         Article Five of the Amended and Restated Bylaws of PTEK Holdings, Inc.
is hereby amended by adding a new Section 5.8 as follows, and by renumbering
Sections 5.8, 5.9, 5.10 and 5.11 as Sections 5.9, 5.10, 5.11 and 5.12:

              "5.8 President of Global Services. The President of Global
                   ----------------------------
         Services (if there be one) shall perform such duties and have such
         authority as from time to time may be designated by the Board of
         Directors or the Chief Executive Officer."
Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual Balance 

in 75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Ann

Balan

75th 

-1.92% -5.70% 1.96% 2.00% 0.04% -3.7

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2005 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actu

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Payroll Tax Rates

Proposed Provision: Raise payroll tax rates (for employees and employers combined) by 2.0 points in 2006 and later

January 4, 2006

Present Law Change From Present Law in Results with this prov

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

0.005.00

10.0015.0020.0025.00

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075

Year

Percent

Cost rates with this provisionCost rates under present lawIncome rates with this provisionIncome rates under present law

OASDI tax rate schedule 

(employees and employers, each)

1993 and later 6.2%

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditu

0

100200300400500600700800900

1000

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 205

Year

Percent

Present law with thi
## Summary Measures and Graphs

- Individual Provisions
- Retirement Age

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						C1.2: Increase the normal retirement age (NRA) 2 months per year for those age 62 starting in 2024 and ending in 2029 (NRA reaches 68 for those age 62 in 2029).**

|  |  |
|--|--|
EXHIBIT 12.3





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      302


THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






I,
      Claudio Del Valle Cabello, certify that:




1.  I
      have
      reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Vitro, S.A. de C.V.;




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 company as of, and for, the periods
      presented in this report;




4.  The
      company's other certifying officers 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 company 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 company, 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 company'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 company's internal control over financial
      reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report
      that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
      affect, the company's internal control over financial reporting; and




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




Date:
                April 24, 2006
            /s/ Claudio Del Valle
                CabelloName:Claudio
                Del Valle CabelloTitle:Chief
                Administrative Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Colon, Appellant.

[774 NYS2d 677]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (William Mogulescu, J.), rendered July 10, 2002, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of two counts of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to consecutive terms of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

After a thorough hearing, the court properly denied defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, made on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. The record establishes that counsel provided effective assistance in connection with the plea *(see People v Ford,*86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; *see also People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; *Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]). Counsel reasonably concluded that no psychiatric defense would have any hope of success, and instead made effective use of defendant’s mental health background as a means of obtaining a plea offer that was as lenient as possible, given the heinous circumstances of this double murder.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.
### Proposed Provision: C2.6. Increase the normal retirement age (NRA) and the earliest eligibility age (EEA) for those age 62 in 2024-2025 to 68 and 63, respectively, and then by 3 months per year in 2026-2029 to 69 and 64, respectively.

back