alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NUMBER 13-24-00011-CV 

COURT OF APPEALS 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF 

ERICA EDITH ALONZO AND JOSE MANUEL FIGUEROA 

AND IN THE INTEREST OF J.J.F., A CHILD

 

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Longoria, Silva, and Peña 

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Peña 

This matter is before the Court on appellants’ first and second motion for extension 

of time to file notice of appeal. We now deny the motions and the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction.

On September 14, 2023, the trial court entered an order granting motion for 

judgment nunc pro tunc and corrected judgment. On October 13, 2023, appellants filed a 
2

motion to reconsider the trial court’s judgment. On January 4, 2024, appellants filed a 

notice of appeal. 

On January 5, 2024, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants that it appeared that 

the appeal was not timely perfected. Appellants were advised that the appeal would be 

dismissed if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the 

Court’s directive. On January 11, 2024, appellants filed a motion for extension of time to 

file a notice of appeal.

Appellants’ motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal was filed more 

than fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal and was untimely. TEX.

R. APP. P. 26.3. We are to construe the rules of appellate procedure reasonably and 

liberally so that the right to appeal is not lost by imposing requirements not absolutely 

necessary to effectuate the purpose of a rule. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 

616–17 (Tex. 1997). Nevertheless, we are prohibited from enlarging the scope of our 

jurisdiction by enlarging the time for perfecting an appeal in a civil case in a manner not 

provided for by rule. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2; In re T.W., 89 S.W.3d 641, 642 (Tex. App.–

Amarillo 2002, no pet.).

Appellants’ notice of appeal was untimely, and appellants first and second motions

for extension of time to file the notice of appeal were also untimely; therefore, we lack 

jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, we deny both motions and dismiss this cause 

for want of jurisdiction.
3

L. ARON PEÑA JR. 

Justice

Delivered and filed on the 

1st day of February, 2024.
Exhibit 32

|   | (1) | To      my knowledge, the report fully complies with the requirements of      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15      U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                         |
|------------------------------|
|                         |
| /s/ John D. Thomas      |
| John      D. Thomas          |
| Chief      Executive Officer |
EXHIBIT 32



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the Report) by Beverly Hills Bancorp Inc. (the Company), the undersigned officer of the Company hereby
certifies that:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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 and for the period covered
by the Report.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |                                                                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  |  | BEVERLY HILLS BANCORP INC.                                             
|                        |  | 
|Date: November 12, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    JOSEPH W. KILEY III                                             
|                        |  |  |  | Joseph W. Kiley III Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 6Federal Reserve Bank of: AtlantaFilings received during the week ending January 23, 2021FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodNONE
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 14.3

                         CONSENT OF MET-CHEM CANADA INC.

Montreal, May 19, 2004

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION                 ONTARIO SECURITIES COMMISSION
450 Fifth St. N. W.                                Suite 1903, Box 55
Washington, DC 20259                               20 Queen Street West
USA                                                Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S8

SUBJECT: Our reports dated April 2001
         MINERAL RESERVES AND RESOURCES

We hereby consent to the inclusion of references to our reports dated April
2001, regarding the mineral reserves and resources of the Copper Rand 5000,
Cedar Bay, Corner Bay Inner Block Deposit, Eastmain Property, Bachelor Lake
Property, Chevrier Property and Discovery Property, which appear under Item 4 in
the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Campbell Resources Inc. (the "Corporation")
for the year ended December 31st, 2003.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (registration Nos. 33-2896, 33-91824,
333-93063 and 333-6236) pertaining to the Corporation's Employee Incentive Plan
and Directors' Stock Option Plan.

MET-CHEM CANADA INC.

(s) Subbiah Srinivasan
------------------------------------------
Subbiah Srinivasan, Eng
Vice-President and Managing Director
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02451-PAB-MJW

TONYA DUNLAP,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

SPEC PRO, INC.,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Extend Discovery and Dispositive

Motions Deadline (docket no. 18) is GRANTED finding good cause shown. The

discovery cut off date is extended to July 31, 2012. The dispositive motion deadline is

extended to August 31, 2012. The Rule 16 Scheduling Order is amended consistent

with this minute order. 

Date: June 14, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02451-PAB-MJW Document 20 Filed 06/14/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of First National Corporation for the year ended
December 31, 2009, I, Harry S. Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer of First National Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, that:



|(1) | such Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, 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 Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of First National Corporation.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                     |  | /s/ Harry S. Smith                   
|Date: March 25, 2010 |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2
                             AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE
                          1997 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN OF
                                  AMETEK, INC.

         WHEREAS, AMETEK, Inc. (formerly known as Ametek Aerospace Products,
Inc.) (the "Company") has adopted the 1997 Stock Incentive Plan of AMETEK, Inc.
(formerly known as the 1997 Stock Incentive Plan of Ametek Aerospace Products,
Inc.) (the "Plan"); and

         WHEREAS, Section 19 of the Plan permits the Committee, as defined in
the Plan (the "Committee") to amend the Plan; and

         WHEREAS, the Committee now desires to amend the Plan in certain
respects;
         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

         1. Section 13 of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the second
sentence of the second paragraph and substituting therefor the following:
                   "Moreover, the Committee may, in its sole discretion,
                  provide, with respect to an Option or Rights granted to any
                  individual (and either at the time of grant of such Option or
                  Rights or by an amendment thereafter to any such outstanding
                  Option or Rights), that the post-termination or post-death
                  exercise period shall be for a period of time specified by the
                  Committee which is longer than the period which would
                  otherwise apply pursuant to this Section 13, but in no event
                  beyond the expiration of the stated term of such Option or
                  Rights."

         2. The provisions of this Amendment No. 3 shall become effective as of
April 1, 2000 and may apply to Option and Rights granted or outstanding on or
after that

<PAGE>   2

date, including, without limitation, outstanding Options and Rights which were
granted prior to that date.

         3. Except to the extent hereinabove set forth, the Plan shall remain in
full force and effect.


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Committee has caused this Amendment to be
executed by a duly authorized officer of the Company, and its corporate seal to
be affixed, as of the 22 day of March, 2000.

                                                      AMETEK, Inc.
                                                      By: /s/ John J. Molinelli
                                                      -------------------------
ATTEST:


 /s/ Donna F. Winquist
 ---------------------
(SEAL)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Case No. 10-cv-01482-LTB-KLM (consolidated with 11-cv-02321-LTB-KLM) 

ONYX PROPERTIES LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, and

LOCAL SERVICE CORPORATION, The Estate of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in re: Simon

E. Rodriguez, Trustee, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ELBERT COUNTY, in its official capacity,

Defendant.

FINAL JUDGMENT

In accordance with the orders filed during the pendency of this case, and

pursuant to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the Order entered by the

Honorable Lewis T. Babcock on March 24, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference

as if fully set forth, it is

ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, Board of

County Commissioners of Elbert County is GRANTED. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that final judgment as a matter of law is hereby entered in

favor of Defendant, Board of County Commissioners of Elbert County and against

Plaintiffs, Onyx Properties LLC and Local Service Corporation, by and through its

Chapter 11 bankruptcy trustee, Simon E. Rodriguez. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant, Board of County Commissioners of Elbert

County shall have its costs by the filing of a Bill of Costs with the Clerk of this Court

within fourteen days of the entry of judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and

Case 1:11-cv-02321-LTB-KLM Document 17 Filed 03/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint and this civil

action are DISMISSED with prejudice.

 

DATED at Denver, Colorado this 24th day of March, 2015.

FOR THE COURT:

JEFFREY P. COLWELL, CLERK

By: s/Emily Buchanan

Emily Buchanan, Deputy Clerk

2

Case 1:11-cv-02321-LTB-KLM Document 17 Filed 03/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### DAVID v. ARMAO.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Dismissed without opinion.
Order entered March 17, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00651-CV

ANDREW WHITE, Appellant

V.

NHI-REIT OF AXEL, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 95th District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-07841

ORDER

On the Court’s own motion, this appeal is REMOVED from submission on 

April 14, 2020. We will reset this appeal in due course.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
1

 In criminal cases originating from the Grand Junction or Durango Jury Divisions of this Court, counsel

shall be prepared to advise the Court at the time of the change of plea hearing whether a written request to have the

sentencing hearing conducted at the courthouse in either Grand Junction or Durango will be filed. See

Administrative Order 2007-8.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00349-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. JOSHUA COLE JOHNSON,

Defendant.

 

ORDER AND NOTICE OF CHANGE OF PLEA AND SENTENCING HEARINGS

 

THIS MATTER comes before the Court following the filing of a Notice of Disposition 

(#24) on January 3, 2012, by Defendant. The Court construes this Notice as a motion to change

his plea and to have the Court consider the terms of the parties’ plea agreement.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(F) and (I), the speedy trial clock is tolled

pending determination of those matters. 

2. A Change of Plea hearing is set for March 5, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. and a Sentencing

hearing is set for May 30, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. in the United States District Court

for the District of Colorado, Courtroom A901, Alfred A. Arraj U.S. Courthouse,

901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado.1

3. The final trial preparation conference set for January 13, 2012, and the January
17, 2012, trial date are VACATED.

Dated this 4th day of January, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge
NO. 04- 15 -00254- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

______________________________________________________

THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND

SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY

Appellants

vs.

OLSVALDO PERALTA

Appellee

_________________________________________________________

APPELLEE’S MOTION FOR LEAVE

TO FILE SUR-REPLY BRIEF

_________________________________________________________

Corbin L. Snow, III Robert W. Clore

State Bar No. 18809100 State Bar No. 24012436

310 West Sunset 15481 S. Padre Island Dr. #101

San Antonio, TX 78209 Corpus Christi, TX 78418

Telephone: (210) 820-0020 Telephone: (361 ) 558-3527

Facsimile: (210) 820-0019 Facsimile: (361) 949-0908

corbinsnow@thesnowlawfirm.com rclore@robclorelaw.com

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

OSVALDO PERALTA ACCEPTED

04-15-00254-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

8/24/2015 3:13:05 PM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERKTO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

Appellee, Osvaldo Peralta, files this Motion for Leave to File Sur

- Reply Brief

and moves for this Court to grant him leave to file his Sur

- Reply Brief. Appellee

seeks leave to file this Sur

- Reply to aid the Court in its decision, and to address

arguments and inaccurate assertions made in Appellant s’ Reply Brief s

.

Appellee respectfully request s th at this Court grant hi s Motion for Leave to

File Sur

- Reply Brief , and deem that Appellee’s Sur

- Reply Brie f , submitted to this

Court contemporaneous with this motion, be filed. Appellee prays for such other

relief, in law or in equity, to which t his Court finds Appellee justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Robert W. Clore

Robert W. Clore

State Bar No. 24012436

15481 S. Padre Island Dr. #101

Corpus Christi, Texas 78418

Telephone: (361) 558

- 3527

Facsimile: (361) 949

- 0908

rclore@robclorelaw.com

Corbin L. Snow, III

State Bar No. 18809100

310 West Sunset

San Antonio, TX 78209

Telephone: (210) 820

- 0020

Facsimile: (210) 8 20

- 0019corbinsnow@thesnow

lawfirm.com

ATTORNEYS FOR

APPELLEE, OSVALDO

PERALTA

CERTIFICATION OF CONFERENCE

I, Robert W. Clore, certify that I communicated with Deborah Lynne Klein,

Attorney for Appellant, the City of San Antonio, and Clarissa M. Rodriguez,

Attorney for Appellant, the San An tonio River Authority, on August 21, 2015 , and

they indicated that they oppose the Motion.

/s/ Robert W. Clore

Robert W. Clore

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that the above and foregoing instrument has been forwarded

to counsel as indicated be low on this the 24 th day of August, 2015.

Deborah Lynne Klein, Attorney for the City of San Antonio,

Deborah.Klein@sanantonio.gov

Clarissa M. Rodriguez, Attorney for the San Antonio River Authority,

clarissa.rodriguez@rampage

- sa.com

Corbin L. Snow, III, Trial Attorney for Appellant Osvaldo Peralta

, corbinsnow@thesnowlawfirm.com

VIA E

- FILING

/ s/ Robert W. Clore

Robert W . Clore
### Order issued: October/8 , 2012



### In The 

## Court of Appeal ifth Bi trict of at Balla

No. 05-11-01276-CV 

### EX PARTE: HAROLD CORNISH On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. Xll-555-R



### ORDER On October9, 2012, the Court received the requested findings of fact from the trial court. The trial court found that the only documents available in this case are: (1) the petition for expunction; (2) the order of expunction; and (3) a copy of an envelope from the Dallas County District Clerk to the Texas Association of School Boards with the date stamp of June 15, 2011. We ADOPT the trial court’s finding that these three documents are the only ones available. On October 11,2012, the Court received a supplemental clerk’ s record containing the above three documents. Appellants’ brief is due THIRTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER.
#### The State of Missouri, Appellant, v. John Dinnisse, Respondent.

St. Louis Court of Appeals,

April 29, 1890.

Jurisdiction: appeals. When,on the appeal of a cause, a constitutional question is fairly raised by the record, this court is, under the decision of the supreme court, precluded from exercising jurisdiction, unless the question is a mere sham ; and whether the constitutional question raised is a sham or not, must be determined by the supreme court.

*23
      *Appeal from Si. Louis Court of Criminal Correction.*Hon. R. A. Campbell, Judge.

Transferred to the supreme court.

Biggs, J.

The defendant was prosecuted in the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, for violating the provisions of an act of the legislature adopted in 1885. The title to the act reads as follows : “ An act to protect the property of manufacturers, bottlers and dealers in mineral waters, soda water and other beverages from the loss of their syphons, bottles and boxes.” Laws, 1885, p. 151.

The trial court quashed the information, and the state has appealed.

The defendant in his brief challenges the constiiutionality of the law under which he was prosecuted.

The supreme court in the case of *State ex rel. Campbell v. The St. Louis Court of*Appeals, 97 Mo. 276, decided that this court could not inquire into the merits of constitutional questions. Previous to this decision, we had uniformly ruled that a constitutional question, in order to deprive us of jurisdiction, must be at least fairly debatable. The supreme court, in the case cited, refused to concur in this view, and held that, when a constitutional question was fairly raised by the record, this court would be precluded from exercising jurisdiction, unless it appeared that the question was a mere ‘ ‘ sham. ’ ’ We also gather from the opinion in that case, that whether the constitutional question is a sham or not, must be determined by the supreme court, and not by this court.

This case will, therefore, be transferred to the supreme court. It is so ordered.

All the judges concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>






<ARTICLE>                 9
<MULTIPLIER>          1,000
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1996

<CASH>                                         43,285
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                    0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   182,352
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        121,959
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          125,061
<LOANS>                                     1,036,429
<ALLOWANCE>                                    14,795
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,417,764
<DEPOSITS>                                  1,115,253
<SHORT-TERM>                                  132,167
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            11,782
<LONG-TERM>                                    14,013
<COMMON>                                        7,812
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                    136,737
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              1,417,764
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                87,872
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              19,679
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                  122
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              107,673
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             46,902
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             53,559
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          54,114
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   2,664
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                34,843
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                25,142
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     25,142
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   17,164
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.71
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   4.41
<LOANS-NON>                                     4,680









<LOANS-PAST>                                    4,710
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                26,400
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               13,371
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   2,524
<RECOVERIES>                                      803
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              14,795
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           14,795
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             0


         





































</TABLE>