alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

<TABLE>
                                             WORTHINGTON FOODS, INC.
                                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<CAPTION>
                                                          THREE MONTHS ENDED               SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                          ------------------               ----------------
                                                        7/3/98          7/4/97          7/3/98          7/4/97
                                                        ------          ------          ------          ------
<S>                                                  <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>        
Basic:

Weighted average number of common
shares outstanding .............................      11,723,816      11,517,857      11,683,762      11,488,176
                                                     ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========

Net income .....................................     $ 2,870,000     $ 2,535,000     $ 5,027,000     $ 4,390,000
                                                     ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========

Earnings per share .............................     $      0.25     $      0.22     $      0.43     $      0.38
                                                     ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========




Diluted:

Weighted average number of common
  shares outstanding ...........................      11,723,816      11,517,857      11,683,762      11,488,176

Net effect of dilutive stock options based
  on the treasury stock method using the
  average market price during the period .......         364,725         489,061         341,217         493,795
                                                     -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------

Weighted average common and common
  equivalent shares used in computing
  earnings per share ...........................      12,088,541      12,006,918      12,024,979      11,981,971
                                                     ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========

Net income .....................................     $ 2,870,000     $ 2,535,000     $ 5,027,000     $ 4,390,000
                                                     ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========

Earnings per share .............................     $      0.24     $      0.21     $      0.42     $      0.37
                                                     ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========
</TABLE>

Note: 1997 share amounts have been adjusted to reflect the four-for-three share
      split in December, 1997.

                                     - 15 -
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

COREY WILLIAMS,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 635 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of May, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<PAGE>






                                   Exhibit 23

<PAGE>


[LOGO] BKD LLP



            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (No. 333-112420) of our report dated January 31, 2006, included in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2005.

/s/ BKD, LLP

Decatur, Illinois
March 23, 2006
<PAGE>


[LOGO] McGladrey & Pullen
       Certified Public Accountants




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (No. 333-112420) of our report dated January 21, 2005, included in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2004.


/s/  McGladrey & Pullen, LLP

Champaign, Illinois
March 23, 2006
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 12.3

                             CORAL RESERVES, INC.
               Calculation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                        Three months ended
                                                           Years ended December 31,                          March 31,
                                                           ------------------------                          ---------
                                             1995        1996       1997         1998         1999        1999       2000
                                             ----        ----       ----         ----         ----        ----       ----
<S>                                         <C>        <C>         <C>          <C>         <C>          <C>        <C>
Earnings
--------
Pre-tax Income                              (26,813)    30,408      18,629      (63,763)     (18,605)     (3,778)   (16,208)
Add: Interest Expense                        21,161     63,952      69,995       73,811      205,023      25,105     66,089
                                            -------    -------     -------      -------     --------     -------    ------
                                             (5,652)    94,360      88,624       10,048      186,418      21,327     49,881

Fixed Charges
-------------
Interest Expense                             21,161     63,952      69,995       73,811      205,023      25,105     66,089
                                            -------    -------     -------      -------     --------     -------    ------


Ratio of earnings to
     fixed charges                               (1)     1.5:1       1.3:1        0.1:1        0.9:1       0.8:1      0.8:1
</TABLE>

(1) Earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $5,652 in 1995.
Exhibit 31                  Rule 13a-14(d) Certification

                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Thomas G. Lehmann, a First Vice President of Washington Mutual
Mortgage Securities Corp., certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
8-K  containing  distribution  or servicing  reports filed in respect of periods
included  in the year  covered  by this  annual  report,  of  WASHINGTON  MUTUAL
MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP. MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-MS3;

     2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, 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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and
servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
these reports;

     4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer
under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and based upon my
knowledge and the annual compliance review required under that agreement, and
except as disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations
under that agreement; and

     5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or
similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar,
agreement, that is included in these reports.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated third parties acting as servicers
and sub-servicers:


J.P. Morgan Chase & Company, Citimortgage, Inc., Flagstar Bank, FSB, Greenpoint
Mortgage Company, Guaranty Residential Lending, National City Mortgage


Dated: March 29, 2005
                                     /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann
                                     ----------------------------------------
                                     Thomas G. Lehmann,
                                     First Vice President
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 3, 2010

s0526 

# Order

June 3, 2010

140400

CHERYL DEBANO-GRIFFIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 140400 COA: 282921 Lake CC: 05-006469-CZ LAKE COUNTY and LA KE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e October 15, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERS E the judgment of the Court of Appeals and
we REMAND this case to the C ourt of Appeals for considera tion of the issue raised by
the defendants but not addresse d by that court during its initia l review of the case. The Court of Appeals erred in holding that the pl aintiff was not engaged in protected activity
under the Whistleblowers Prot ection Act (WPA), MCL 15.361 et seq . Reporting a “suspected violation of a la w” is protected activity. MC L 15.362. MC L 211.24f(2)(d) requires the ballot to include “[a] clear stat ement of the purpose fo r the millage.” In City of South Haven v Van Buren Co Bd of Comm’rs

, 478 Mich 518, 533 n 23, 534 (2007), this Court, relying on this st atutory language, held that “f unds derived from levies must be used for the purpose stat ed in the ballot,” and that using such funds for another purpose would “violate the law.” See also, MCL 750.489; MCL 750.490; MCL 141.439. Accordingly, when the plainti ff reported her concerns that the ambulance funds were being used for purpos es other than those stated in the ballot, the plaintiff was reporting a “suspected violation of a law,” and, thus, was engaged in protected activity. Because the plaintiff reported a suspected violation of an actual law, it is unnecessary to address whether the reporting of a suspected violation of a suspected law constitutes protected activity.

K ELLY

, C.J., would grant leave to appeal.
| 1. | I      have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,      2009 of Bluegate Corporation; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a      material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements      were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this      report; |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Based      on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the      financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the      registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this      report; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | The      registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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)) and internal      control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules      13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and  have: |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5. | The      registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on      our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,      to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board      of directors (or persons performing the equivalent    functions): |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      April 24, 2009    |   |
|------------------------------|--------|
|                         |   |
|                         |   |
| /s/ Stephen J. Sperco        |   |
| Stephen      J. Sperco       |   |
| Chief      Executive Officer |   |
Exhibit 32

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 periodic report of Rancon Realty Fund V (the Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Daniel L. Stephenson, General Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, that I perform the functions of chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the Partnership, and that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Partnership at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form with the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



|                   |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------ |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 14, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ Daniel L. Stephenson             
|                   |  |  |  | Daniel L. Stephenson, General Partner
|                   |  |  |  | Rancon Realty Fund V
#### Roy Edward EVANS, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Nov. 23, 1973.

*66Henry E. Hughes, Lexington, for appellant.

Ed W. Hancock, Atty. Gen., Kenneth A. Howe, Jr., Asst. Deputy Atty. Gen., Frankfort, for appellee.

CULLEN, Commissioner.

“Entering” is not a required element of the offense of storehouse breaking, defined in KRS 433.190, for which appellant was indicted. See Henry v. Commonwealth, 169 Ky. 548, 184 S.W. 870; Kidd v. Commonwealth, 273 Ky. 300, 116 S.W.2d 636. The words “and entered” in the charge of the indictment that the appellant “broke and entered” the storehouse therefore may be treated as surplus-age. Cf. Stringer v. Commonwealth, 192 Ky. 318, 233 S.W. 718; Profitt v. Commonwealth, Ky., 281 S.W.2d 898. Those words being surplusage, it was not necessary for the Commonwealth to prove an entry.

The cases cited by the appellant, holding that an instruction permitting conviction as a principal is prejudicially erroneous where the evidence tends *only*to prove the defendant guilty as an aider and abettor, do not support the proposition, argued by the appellant, that where the evidence *warrants*conviction of the defendant as a principal, an instruction on aiding and abetting is required. Here the evidence warranted a conviction of the defendant as a principal; hence, it was not necessary to instruct on aiding and abetting.

The judgment is affirmed.

All concur.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 02, 2022.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, August 02, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22A1495. KUNTERRIUS WOODARD v. THE STATE.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this 

Court and with Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration of errors 

and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals Rule 13.

On June 24, 2022, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and a 

brief no later than July 11, 2022. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of 

errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is 

hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).
#### Herman Lee BLACK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 44402.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 14, 1971.

*470Henry J. McCluskey, Jr., Dallas, for appellant.

Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is unlawfully carrying a prohibited weapon; the punishment, a fine of $350.00.

A sentence must be pronounced in every felony case and in every misdemeanor case except where the maximum possible punishment is by fine only. Art. 42.02, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. Further, the sentence in a case like that at bar shall be pronounced before the appeal is taken. Art. 42.04, V.A.C.C.P.

The record before us does not include a sentence pronounced by the court below as required by Article 40.09, Section 1, V.A.C.C.P. While the record does contain a judgment, it is to be remembered that a sentence is separate and independent. Botley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 467 S.W.2d 267 (1971). Where a necessary sentence does not appear in the transcript, the appeal will be dismissed. Clemons v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 414 S.W.2d 940 (1967); Hodges v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 417 S.W.2d 178 (1967); Adams v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 440 S.W.2d 844 (1969).

It is so ordered.
#### PUCKETT v. TEHOE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
#### VINCENT FENNECK v. NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE BOARD.

September 5, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM GLASGAL
COMMUNICATIONS  INC.'S FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS AS OF JULY 31, 1997, AS AMENDED AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                                 759
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       12,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                          (503)
<INVENTORY>                                          2,473
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    22,518
<PP&E>                                               6,737
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (3,178)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      29,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               25,461
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                25
<OTHER-SE>                                           1,096
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        29,533
<SALES>                                             18,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    18,600
<CGS>                                               11,277
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       11,277
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     6,844
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     454
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         25
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     25
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                            25
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        

</TABLE>
#### Louis M. WALLER, Appellant, v. James A. WATTS, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Sept. 20, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 9, 1973.

*62Louis M. Waller, Brandenburg, for appellant.

John W. Bland, Jr., Paul Lewis, Lewis & Bland, Elizabethtown, for appellee.

STEPHENSON, Justice.

Louis M. Waller, a candidate for the office of county attorney of Meade County in the May 1973 Democratic Primary, filed a contest suit in the Meade Circuit Court seeking to invalidate all the absentee ballots cast in the county attorney’s race. Waller appeals from a judgment of the Meade Circuit Court dismissing the petition.

Waller filed in the record a document styled “Supersedeas Bond.” The purported supersedeas bond is signed by Waller but there is no surety thereon as required by the mandatory language of KRS 122.040(1). We conclude that a “su-persedeas bond” without a surety is no bond at all; that a supersedeas bond in an appeal of an election contest case is a jurisdictional requisite for review by this court. The appeal is dismissed *sua sponte.*See Webb v. Webb, Ky., 500 S.W.2d 59 (rendered September 20, 1973) for a more extensive discussion of a like circumstance.

The appeal is dismissed and the mandate shall issue forthwith but without prejudice to the right of the losing party to pursue any additional remedies provided by law.

PALMORE, C. J., and JONES, MILLI-KEN, OSBORNE, REED, STEINFELD, and STEPHENSON, JJ., sitting.

All concur.