alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered December 16, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00249-CR

AARON LEDELL CELESTINE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F22-00005-I

ORDER

Appellant’s brief is overdue. The brief was originally due August 10, 2022. 

We subsequently granted appellant three extensions of time to file the brief, on 

August 11, 2022, September 16, 2022, and October 19, 2022. Following the third 

extension on October 19, 2022, appellant’s brief was due November 10, 2022. We 

cautioned counsel that if the brief were not filed by November 10, 2022, we would 

abate the case for the trial court to hold a hearing and determine why the brief has 

not been filed. As of the date of this order, appellant’s brief has not been filed.
The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why 

appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make 

appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant 

desires to prosecute the appeals, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, 

whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). 

If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court 

shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 

708 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is 

indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary 

to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which 

shall include written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY 

DAYS of the date of this order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above 

order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or 

when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL

JUSTICE
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 17, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.106.c Consolidated Statement for Federal, State, and Local Governments** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE BOYD N. BOLAND

____________________________________________________________________________ 

Civil Action: 11-cv-02765-WJM-BNB Date: May 1, 2013 

Courtroom Deputy: Julie Dynes FTR: BNB COURTROOM A-401 

 

Parties Counsel

DALIP BASANTI DezaRae D. LaCrue 

 Natalie A. Brown 

 Plaintiff(s), 

v. 

JEFFREY METCALF, M.D. Sheryl K. Bridges 

 Barbara H. Glogiewicz 

JASON ROZESKI, M.D. Kevin J. Kuhn

John P. Streelman 

PLATTE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER S. Jane Mitchell 

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Mark Pestal 

 Defendant(s). 

COURTROOM MINUTES 

MOTIONS HEARING

Court in Session: 8:38 a.m. 

Appearance of counsel. 

Argument presented on [126] Motion in Limine to Preclude Disclosure of Subsequent Expert 

Witness Report Due to Inadvertent Disclosure 

ORDERED: [126] Motion in Limine to Preclude Disclosure of Subsequent Expert Witness 

Report Due to Inadvertent Disclosure is DENIED for reasons stated on the 

record. 

Argument presented on [131] Motion for Leave to Exceed Deposition Time Limit. 

ORDERED: [131] Motion for Leave to Exceed Deposition Time Limit is GRANTED. 

Parties allowed an additional 3 1⁄2 hours to question Dr. Huffman 

about matters not previous made. Deposition may occur by video conference 

and is to occur on or before June 10, 2013 in Branson or Springfield, Missouri. 

Case 1:11-cv-02765-PAB-NYW Document 155 Filed 05/01/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
* To obtain a transcript of this proceeding, please contact Avery Woods Reporting at (303) 825-6119.

Discovery deadline extended to July 2, 2013 to complete depositions. 

 

Argument presented on [135] Amended Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, and 

Motion for Immediate Hearing. 

ORDERED: [135] Amended Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, and Motion 

for Immediate Hearing is GRANTED. 

The Court finds the contract requested is relevant or reasonably calculated to 

lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, but the defendant United States of 

America is to serve the subpoena as required by the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure. 

Argument presented [137] Motion to Enforce F.R.C.P. 30(d)(1) and Request for Expedited 

Briefing. 

ORDERED: [137] Motion to Enforce F.R.C.P. 30(d)(1) and Request for Expedited Briefing 

is DENIED. 

Court in Recess: 10:05 a.m. Hearing concluded. Total time in Court: 01:27 

Case 1:11-cv-02765-PAB-NYW Document 155 Filed 05/01/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

# **Officer’s Certification**

 

I,Preston A. Miller, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of AmeriCreditFinancial Services, Inc. (“AmeriCredit”), certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this annual report on Form10-K/A, and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicingreports filed in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annualreport, of AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2002-A;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, the information inthese reports, taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the servicinginformation required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under thesale and servicing agreement is included in these reports;

 

4.               I am responsible for reviewing the activitiesperformed by the servicer under the sale and servicing agreement and based uponthe review required under the sale and servicing agreement, and except asdisclosed in the report, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under thesale and servicing agreement; and

 

5.               The reports disclose all significantdeficiencies relating to the servicer’s compliance with the minimum servicingstandards based upon the report provided by an independent public accountant,after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single AttestationProgram for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the sale andservicing agreement, that is included in these reports.

 

 
| Date:                                  | April 21, 2004        |   |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------------|--------|
|                                   | /s/ Preston A. Miller |   |
| Preston  A. Miller                     |
| Chief  Financial Officer and Treasurer |
|                                        |                       |        |  |  |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     See accompanying notes.
     $ in thousands, except per share data.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-START>                            JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                         30310
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  18248
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                    17524
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               72412
<PP&E>                                         65327
<DEPRECIATION>                                     0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                140261
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20447
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        1
<COMMON>                                         239
<OTHER-SE>                                         0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  140261
<SALES>                                        46143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   0
<CGS>                                          31789
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  20
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               481 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 2935
<INCOME-TAX>                                    1115
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                0
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1820
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .25
        


</TABLE>
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-17-00223-CR

IN RE CRAIG MACK

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

AL SCOGGINS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Petition denied

Opinion delivered and filed July 26, 2017

Do not publish

[OT06]
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1612 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1612

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend the penalty provisions in the International Emergency Economic 
                  Powers Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``International Emergency Economic 
Powers Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF IEEPA.

    (a) In General.--Section 206 of the International Emergency 
Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 206. PENALTIES.

    ``(a) Unlawful Acts.--It shall be unlawful for a person to violate, 
attempt to violate, conspire to violate, or cause a violation of any 
license, order, regulation, or prohibition issued under this title.
    ``(b) Civil Penalty.--A civil penalty may be imposed on any person 
who commits an unlawful act described in subsection (a) in an amount 
not to exceed the greater of--
            ``(1) $250,000; or
            ``(2) an amount that is twice the amount of the transaction 
        that is the basis of the violation with respect to which the 
        penalty is imposed.
    ``(c) Criminal Penalty.--A person who willfully commits, willfully 
attempts to commit, or willfully conspires to commit, or aids or abets 
in the commission of, an unlawful act described in subsection (a) 
shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a 
natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or 
both.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--
            (1) Civil penalties.--Section 206(b) of the International 
        Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended by subsection (a), 
        shall apply to violations described in section 206(a) of such 
        Act with respect to which enforcement action is pending or 
        commenced on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
            (2) Criminal penalties.--Section 206(c) of the 
        International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended by 
        subsection (a), shall apply to violations described in section 
        206(a) of such Act with respect to which enforcement action is 
        commenced on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the Senate June 26, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1612

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend the penalty provisions in the International Emergency Economic 
                  Powers Act, and for other purposes.
```
[Cite as Robinette v. Middletown, 2020-Ohio-1427.]

{¶1} On February 24, 2020, a special master recommended dismissal of

requester Mike Robinette’s complaint after the special master determined that Robinette 

failed to comply with court orders and failed to prosecute his claim. The parties were 

given an opportunity to respond to the special master’s recommendation to dismiss. 

Neither party has filed a response to the special master’s recommendation. 

{¶2} The court finds the special master’s recommendation is well-taken. Upon 

the recommendation of the special master and in accordance with R.C. 2743.75(D)(2), 

the court sua sponte DISMISSES Robinette’s complaint without prejudice. Court costs 

are assessed against Robinette. The court directs the clerk to serve upon all parties 

notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal.

 

 PATRICK M. MCGRATH 

Judge 

 

Filed March 25, 2020 

Sent to S.C. Reporter 4/10/20

MIKE ROBINETTE 

 Requester 

 v. 

CITY OF MIDDLETOWN 

 Respondent

Case No. 2019-01096PQ 

Judge Patrick M. McGrath 

JUDGMENT ENTRY
Exhibit 23

                          Independent Auditors' Consent


The Board of Directors
TierOne Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference herein of our report dated February 13,
2004, except as to note 24, which is as of February 27, 2004, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of TierOne Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the related consolidated statements of income,
stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2003, which report appears in
the December 31, 2003 annual report on Form 10-K of TierOne Corporation.


                                              /s/ KPMG LLP


Lincoln, Nebraska
March 10, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Registrant is a limited partnership which invests in real estate and real
estate joint ventures.  In accordance with industry practice, its balance
sheet is unclassified.  For full information, refer to the accompanying
unaudited financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,101,333
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,402,519<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (177,507)<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,402,519<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,957<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                42,719<F5>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,762)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3,762)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,762)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.05)<F6>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>In addition to cash, total assets include net deferred expenses of 
$195,523, and other assets of $105,663.
<F2>Represents partners' capital deficiency.
<F3>Liabilities include investments in unconsolidated partnerships of
$1,186,283 and accounts payable and other liabilities of $393,743.
<F4>Represents interest and other revenue.
<F5>Total expense includes depreciation and amortization of $9,309 and
general and administrative of $33,410.
<F6>Represents net income per Unit of limited partnership interest.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                            Washington, D.C.  20549

                                   FORM 8-K

                                CURRENT REPORT

                      Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
                      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934


                                August 11, 2000
                               ----------------
                       (Date of Earliest Event Reported)



                              SOLV-EX CORPORATION
                              -------------------
            (Exact Name of Registrant as specified in its charter)



                                  New Mexico
                                  ----------
                (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)



             0-9897                                    85-0283729
             ------                                    ----------
    (Commission File Number)             (IRS Employer Identification Number)



                2127 Menaul NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico   87107
                -----------------------------------------------
          (Address of principal executive offices including zip code)



                                (505) 883-0331
                                --------------
              (Registrant's telephone number including area code)


                                Not Applicable
                                --------------
         (Former name or former address, if changed since last report)
<PAGE>

Item 5.  Other Items
         -----------

  Holders of Solv-Ex Corporation Series 5A Warrants Expiring August 31, 2000
                               CUSIP 834382 11 1


On August 11, 2000, the Board of Directors of Solv-Ex Corporation extended the
maturity date of the Series 5A Warrants from August 31, 2000 to August 31, 2002.
All other terms and conditions of the Series 5A Warrants will remain the same
until further notice.

                                      -2-
<PAGE>

                                  SIGNATURES
                                  ----------

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


Date:  August 14, 2000              SOLV-EX CORPORATION
                                    (Registrant)



                                    By /s/ Frank Ciotti
                                       -------------------------------------
                                       Frank Ciotti,
                                       Chief Financial Officer

                                      -3-
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff *v.*Myron Pearsall, Jr., Defendant.

County Court, Nassau County,

May 3, 1957.

*Cornelius J. Barry, Jr.*for defendant.

*Frank A. Gulotta, District Attorney,*for plaintiff.

Paul J. Widlitz, J.

This is a motion by the defendant for an order pursuant to sections 667 and 668 of the Code of Criminal Procedure dismissing an indictment for want of prosecution. The defendant stands accused under an indictment dated January 29, 1957 of having committed on or about March' 29, 1953 the crime of forgery in the second degree, a felony. An information charging the defendant with the aforesaid crime was filed in the Nassau County District Court on December 29, 1955. Thirteen months later, on January 29, 1957, the case was presented to the Grand Jury. Defendant contends that he has been substantially prejudiced by the delay in indictment and is entitled to a dismissal of the action under the authority of sections 667 and 668.

Section 667 provides: *‘*‘ When a pérson has been held to answer for a crime, if an indictment be not found against him, at the next term of the court at which he is held, to answer, the court may on application of the defendant order the prosecution to be dismissed, unless good cause to the contrary be shown.” Admittedly, the defendant’s case was not presented to the Grand Jury at the next term after the information was filed on December 29, 1955. However, the defendant’s detention from 1955 until the present, was not as a result of charges filed against him in this proceeding. Bather, it appears from the papers that the defendant was incarcerated in the Auburn State Prison from June 15, 1954 until the present time under a judgment of conviction rendered in another jurisdiction. The defendant’s application under section 667 is untimely made. This section is designed to compel the District Attorney *41to move with dispatch in presenting a case to the Grand Jury once the prosecution has been commenced. Once the indictment has been found, however, section 667 is no longer available to the defendant since the injustice which the section is designed to remedy has been purged by the finding of the indictment. In this action an indictment has been found and is swiftly being prosecuted by the District Attorney.

Section 668 provides that, where a defendant *has been indicted,*the indictment may be dismissed if not brought to trial at the next term of court after it has been found unless good cause to the contrary be shown. On this application defendant does not contend that the delay from the time the indictment was rendered, January 29, 1957, until the April Term of this court, when the action was first noticed for trial, was unreasonable or without good cause. Indeed, the District Attorney has presented a valid reason for the relatively short delay. Accordingly, since the District Attorney has shown good cause for the brief delay in bringing the action to trial since the rendering of the indictment, this application to dismiss the action and the indictment is denied.

Submit order.