alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
THE ATTORNEY GENE-L am TEXAS AUSTIN. TEXA= 78711 January 16, 1963

Mr. Steve Hurt County Attorney Hale County Plainview,Texas Dear Mr. Hurt: Opinion No. C-l Re: Exemption from ad valorem taxes of houses owned and rented by Wayland Baptist College You request the opinion of the Attorney Generalas to whether certainhouses owned by Wayland Baptist College in Plainview,Texas, are exempt from ad valorem taxes. You state these houses are rented to married studentsand facultymembers. Section 2 of Article 8 of the Texas Constitution, in itspertinent portion, reads es followar

II the legislaturemay, by general laws; &pt from taxation
. ,s.all buildings uaed exclusively and owned by person8 or asaociations of person8 for echo01purposes. . . .' Article 7150, Section 1,Vernon's Civil Statutes, in its pertinent portion, exempts from ad valorem taxes,

II

. . .buildingsused exclusively and owned by persons or association! of persons for schoolpurposes; . . . All of the buildings and all of the land necessarily uaed In the aonduct of the schoolare exempt from ad valorem taxes. Cassianov. Crsuline Academy, 64Tex. 673 (1885).

If the housesare rented for profit to personswho occupy them principally for the purpose of a residence, then such houses are not exempt although the rentpayments to the college'maybe used by It in the conduct of the school. Red v. Morris, 72 Tex. 554i 10 S.W. 681 (1889);Red v. Johnson, 53m. .Z%T7380); Edmondsv. City of San Antonio, Jb S.W. 495 (Civ. App. 1896, error ref.).

A house owned by a school is exempt from taxation, even though a facultymember or student thereof reside therein, if such residence Is to afford protection, guidance and trainingMr. Steve Hurt, Page 2 (OpinionNo. C-l)

to studentsoutside of the classroom, or if such residence is for the convenience of the collegeby reason of their residing at that particular localitywith reference to their obligations to the school,or for some reason with reference to the property itselfwhich is the concern of the college rather than’of themselvesand is In fact used exclusively for schoolDurposea. (8upra);-Redv. Morris (supra); 417 (C1v.A p. x. 402, 23

t lg50) $udgment S.W.2d 41 (1950); 57N.Y.S.2d 6 (N.Y.Sup.Ct. torney General of Texas (1947). We do not have sufficient factsupon which to apply the above tests.

We are enclosinga aopy of Attorney General OpinionV-09 Issued in 1947.
SUMMARY

Whether houses rented‘byWayland Raptist College to’its facultymembers and married students are exempt from ad valorem taxes Is a question to be determined from’all facts incldent to such tenancy.

If the occupancy is primarily for the benefit of the college and within scope of the cases cited in this opinion the houses are exempt. Yours very truly, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General of Texas

As8iStant WEA:pw

-2-Mr. Steve Hurt, Page 3 (OpinionNo.&1)

APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman John Reeves Robert Lewis Charles Lind Frank Booth APPROVED: Stanton Stone, ExecutiveAssistant Waggoner Carr, Attorney General

-3-
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David B. Brame, Jr., Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered August 26, 1988, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Rubin, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRIAN K. THOMPSON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 420 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 23rd day of January, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<PAGE>
CONTACT:          Raoul J. Witteveen
                           (212) 916-3261



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


                INTERPOOL TO PAY CASH DIVIDEND ON COMMON STOCK

PRINCETON, NJ, December 22, 1997 - Interpool, Inc. (NYSE: IPX) announced that
it will pay a cash dividend of 3.75 cents per share for the fourth quarter of
1997. The dividend will be payable on January 15, 1998 to shareholders of
record on January 2, 1998. The aggregate amount of the dividend is expected to
be approximately $1,033,000.00. The amount of the quarterly dividend is based
on a 1997 annualized dividend rate of 15 cents per share.

Interpool, originally founded in 1968, is one of the world's leading lessors
of cargo containers used in international trade and is the second largest
lessor of intermodal container chassis in the United States. Interpool leases
its containers and chassis to over 200 customers, including nearly all of the
world's 20 largest international container shipping lines.


                                                          # # #
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
 
 
 
 Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 This 12 th day of March, 2004./s/ Joseph W. EvansChief Executive Officer/s/ J. Daniel SpeightChief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, Howard J. Nellor,certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Peerless Systems Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: May 1, 2006         /s/ Howard J. Nellor   Howard J. Nellor   President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>
                        RESTATED

<ARTICLE>                                           7
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                        0000897430
<NAME>                       TIG Holdings, Inc. 
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           0
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          4,111
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            4,111
<EQUITIES>                                     0
<MORTGAGE>                                     0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 4,284
<CASH>                                         24
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             1,254
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         152
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 6,555
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                3,695
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            708
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                124
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          25
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,206
<OTHER-SE>                                     259
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   6,555
<PREMIUMS>                                     353
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            75
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             1
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 0
<BENEFITS>                                     253
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                54
<INCOME-TAX>                                   18
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            36
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   36
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.64
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0
        


</TABLE>
#### LINDELL TRUST COMPANY, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Virginia B. FEINBERG and Daniel B. Feinberg, Defendants/Appellants.

No. 68482.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

April 16, 1996.

Gary M. Siegel, David M. Segall, St. Louis, for Virginia Feinberg.

Jerry A. Klein, Clayton, for Daniel Fein-berg.

Richard A. Wunderlich, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Virginia Feinberg appeals from the granting of summary judgment in favor of Lindell Trust Company in the amount of $149,752.83. We affirm.

An extended opinion would serve no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5166

Scosche Industries, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20078-20079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9965]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Establishment of the Military Health Care Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Military Health Care Advisory Committee (MHCAC) is being 
established in consonance with the public interest, and in accordance 
with the provisions of Public Law 92-463, the ``Federal Advisory 
Committee Act.''
    The MHCAC will advise the Secretary of Defense, Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Health Affairs, and other senior officials in both the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Military Departments, on 
problems, [[Page 20079]] opportunities, preferred solutions, and 
strategies for managing and sustaining a comprehensive and effective 
military health care system. Included among the specific areas to be 
examined and evaluated will be: enhancing beneficiary support and care; 
increasing medical readiness and preparedness to meet national security 
missions; increasing the efficiency of both military and private sector 
medical and health care systems; and, identifying and implementing 
measures to reduce health risks and improve the health of 
beneficiaries, especially active duty troops.
    The Committee will be composed of 15-20 members who will be a 
diverse mix of individuals from government, industry, academia, and the 
private sector, with varied backgrounds in military health care 
disciplines. Efforts will be made to ensure a balanced membership, 
considering the functions to be performed and the interest groups 
represented.
    For further information regarding the MHCAC, contact: Mr. Gary 
Christopherson, (703) 697-2111.

    Dated: April 17, 1995.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-9965 Filed 4-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
```
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.31

International Digital Investors, L.P.
January 15, 1997
Page 1

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

                             STYLES ON VIDEO, INC.
                          667 RANCHO CONEJO BOULEVARD
                        NEWBURY PARK, CALIFORNIA  91320


                                    January 15, 1997


International Digital Investors, L.P.
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2420
Miami, Florida  33131

Gentlemen:

     Reference is made to that certain Note and Preferred Stock Purchase
Agreement (the "Purchase Agreement") dated May 14, 1996 by and among Styles on
Video, Inc. ("SOV"), a Delaware corporation, Forever Yours, Inc. ("FYI"), a
California corporation, and International Digital Investors, L.P. ("IDI"), a
Delaware limited partnership, which provides for the purchase of certain
promissory notes, preferred stock and warrants of SOV in accordance with certain
terms and conditions contained therein.  Each of the parties to said Purchase
Agreement have agreed to increase the principal amount of funds borrowed under
the Purchase Agreement in accordance with that certain Letter Agreement dated
November 21, 1996 among IDI, SOV and FYI.

     The execution of this Letter Agreement will serve as the acknowledgment by
the undersigned that the principal amount borrowed pursuant to the Purchase
Agreement is hereby increased $180,000 from $1,020,000 to $1,200,000.  The
accrual of interest expense with respect to such $180,000 increase in amount
borrowed under the Purchase Agreement shall commence on the date of this Letter
Agreement.

     The execution of this Letter Agreement shall in no way limit or waive any
responsibilities, obligations or claims of each of the parties hereto with
respect to the terms, conditions and related agreements existing under and/or
created in connection with the Purchase Agreement.

     This letter may be executed in one or more counterparts.
<PAGE>
 
International Digital Investors, L.P.
January 15, 1997
Page 2

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

     Please indicate your agreement and consent to the foregoing by signing the
enclosed copy of this letter where indicated below and return the same to the
attention of the undersigned on behalf of SOV.


                                       Sincerely,                            
                                                       
                                       STYLES ON VIDEO, INC.
                                                            
     
                                       By:__________________________________
                                                                            
                                       FOREVER YOURS, INC.                  
                                                                            
                                                                            
                                       By:__________________________________



AGREED TO and ACCEPTED this
15th day of January 1997.



INTERNATIONAL DIGITAL INVESTORS, L.P.


By:_______________________________
Tel: 972-871-8000 Sales Dept. Fax: 972-871-8888 

www.beckettus.com 

BECKETT CORPORATION

3250 Skyway Circle North 

Irving, Texas 75038-3527 

October 8, 2018 

Robert E. Lighthizer 

United States Trade Representative 

Office of the United States Trade Representative 

600 17th Street NW 

Washington, DC 20508 

Re: Section 301 Tariffs - Request for Exclusion of Beckett Corporation’s Water Pump Product 

Dear Mr. Lighthizer: 

Beckett Corporation (“Beckett”), a Texas corporation, provides this letter in support of our request for a 

product exclusion from the Section 301 Tariffs. The product of concern, classified under HTSUS 8413.70.2090, is a 

centrifugal water pump specially designed for use with various residential and commercial air conditioning systems. 

The pump is manufactured in China by our wholly owned subsidiary. As such, the pump is subject to an 

additional 25 percent tariff as it is classified as having a China country of origin and is within the tariff codes 

identified in the Section 301 determination (“List 1”). 

The 25 percent tariff is significantly and negatively impacting our U.S. business, driving prices up and 

impacting the competitiveness of Beckett’s products. Not only are the Section 301 Tariffs damaging our business, 

but also, adversely affecting U.S. manufacturers, retailers and customers, who rely on this Product for proper 

functioning of residential and commercial air conditioning systems. Importantly, Beckett is the only supplier of 

these particular water pumps having these particular specifications. As a result of such price impacts, the Section 

301 Tariffs are affecting U.S. jobs, including Beckett’s employees, and the U.S.-customers’ workers, customers, 

distributors and agents. 

As we understand the policies behind the Section 301 Tariffs, we do not believe the damage being caused by 

the imposition of an additional 25 percent tariff to our business and the impact on the U.S. supply chain is an 

intended or desired consequence. 

Therefore, we respectfully request that you grant our exclusion request. 

 Best Regards, 

 

 Wingate Sung 

 Executive VP & COO 

 Beckett Corporation
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





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lucas Energy, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William A. Sawyer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: (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/William A. Sawyer


William A. Sawyer


Chief Executive Officer


November 15, 2010