alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 19

- 00234

- CV

JASON CORNETT AND SA NDRA CORNETT

, Appellant s

v.

WILLIAM WARD

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No

. 1

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court No. CC

- C20190539

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, Jason and Sandra Cornett, filed their pro se notice of appeal on July

15, 2019, challenging the trial court’s judgment entered on July 8, 2019, in favor of William

Ward. By letter dated July 23, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant s that the

appeal is subject to dismissal because the original filing fee had not been paid and warned

appellants that the Court would dismiss the appeal unless, within ten days from the date

of the letter, appellants paid the filing fee or obtained indige nt status for the purpose ofCornett , et al. v. W ard Page 2

appeal. Ten days have passed, and appellants have not paid the filing fee for this appeal

or obtained indigent status. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

.

P. 42.3(c).

JOHN E. NEILL

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed August 14, 2019

[CV06]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [WY-923-1310-FI; WYW174414]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Under the provisions of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a petition for reinstatement from Royal Oil, LLC for competitive oil and gas lease WYW174414 for land in Niobrara County, Wyoming. The petition was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the lease terminated under the law.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bureau of Land Management, Julie L. Weaver, Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication, at (307) 775-6176.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The lessee has agreed to the amended lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $10 per acre or fraction thereof, per year and 16                    2/3                     percent, respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500 administrative fee and $163 to reimburse the Department for the cost of this                     **Federal Register**                     notice. The lessee has met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in Sections 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), and the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate lease WYW174414 effective February 1, 2010, under the original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above. The BLM has not issued a valid lease to any other interest affecting the lands.                

Julie L. Weaver,

Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication.

[FR Doc. 2010-21899 Filed 9-1-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
---

VIA EDGAR

To:
    United States Securities and ExchangeCommissionRe:
    Tahoe Resources Inc. (the Company)Annual Report on Form 40-FConsent of Expert


This consent is provided in connection with the Companys
annual report on Form 40-F to be filed by the Company with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission and any amendments thereto (the Annual
Report). The Annual Report incorporates by reference, among other things,
the Companys Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2014 (the
Annual Information Form).

I, Matthew Blattman, P.E. of Blattman Brothers Consulting LLC,
Cypress, Texas, hereby consent to:

| |  | the use of my name in connection with my
      involvement in the preparation of the technical report entitled Escobal
      Guatemala Project NI 43-101 Feasibility Studyissued on November 5,
      2014, with effective dates of January 23, 2014 for the Escobal Mineral
      Resource Estimate and July 1, 2014 for the Escobal Mineral Reserve
      Estimate (the Technical Report);
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
| |  | references to the Technical Report, or portions
      thereof, in the Annual Information Form; and                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
| |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
| |  | the inclusion and incorporation by reference of
  the information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Dated the 12thday of
March, 2015



|                      
|----------------------
|Matthew Blattman, P.E.





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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000771214
<NAME> ELMER'S RESTAURANTS, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,437,712
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  289,768
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (5,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    215,086
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,096,877
<PP&E>                                      12,368,650
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,558,833
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,930,862
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,268,082
<BONDS>                                      2,842,532
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,417,034
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,363,213
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,930,862
<SALES>                                      7,943,485
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,401,857
<CGS>                                        4,915,932
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,909,451
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             151,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                413,501
<INCOME-TAX>                                   140,590
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            272,911
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   272,911
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. GREGORY SCOTT.

July 11, 1985.

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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from financial
statments in the Registrant's form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000771178
<NAME>         VANGUARD CELLULAR
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                        7,079
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                61,191
<ALLOWANCES>                                  8,649
<INVENTORY>                                  16,598
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            125,264
<PP&E>                                      558,413
<DEPRECIATION>                              181,212
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              836,094
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        48,119
<BONDS>                                     199,841
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                        372
<OTHER-SE>                                  (40,238)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                836,094
<SALES>                                      89,980
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             97,959
<CGS>                                         7,413
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                18,077
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             68,140
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           15,683
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (18,219)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (1,461)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (3,971)
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                (20,729)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (0.55)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.55)
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

# AGENCY:

National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting (via teleconference call) on September 17, 2010.

# SUMMARY:

The Hydrographic Services Review Panel (HSRP), a Federal Advisory Committee, will be holding a public meeting via teleconference on September 17, 2010. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss and on vote on proposed revisions to an updated version of HSRP's Special Report entitled, “HSRP Most Wanted Hydrographic Services Improvements 2007.”

*Date and Time:*                         The teleconference will commence at 2 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Friday, September 17, 2010, and will end on or about 3 p.m.                    

*Public Participation:*                         The teleconference will be open to the public and the last 15 minutes will be set aside for oral or written comments.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Captain John E. Lowell, Jr., Designated Federal Official (DFO), or Kathy Watson, HSRP Program Coordinator, Office of Coast Survey, National Ocean Service (NOS), NOAA (N/CS), 1315 East West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910; Telephone: (301) 713-2770 x158; Fax: (301) 713-4019; E-mail:                         *Hydroservices.panel@noaa.gov*                         or visit the NOAA HSRP Web site at                         *http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/​ocs/​hsrp/​hsrp.htm.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This teleconference is available to the public through the following, toll free call-in number: 1-866-658-4142; participant passcode: 8479431. Interested members of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Written public comments should be submitted to Captain John E. Lowell, Jr., Designated Federal Officer (DFO), by September 13, 2010.

Dated: August 27, 2010.

John Lowell,

Director, Office of Coast Survey, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

[FR Doc. 2010-21882 Filed 8-31-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-JE-P
II 

Calendar No. 553 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2665 

[Report No. 113–250] 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

Act to provide eligibility for broadcasting facilities to receive certain 

disaster assistance, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 24, 2014 

Mr. BEGICH introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 

Reported by Mr. CARPER, without amendment 

A BILL 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to provide eligibility for broadcasting facilities to receive certain disaster assistance, 

and for other purposes. 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2665 RS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Emergency Informa3 tion Improvement Act of 2014’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF BROADCASTING FACILITIES FOR 

5 CERTAIN DISASTER ASSISTANCE. 

6 (a) PRIVATE NONPROFIT FACILITY DEFINED.—Sec7 tion 102(11)(B) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

8 and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(11)(B)) 

9 is amended by inserting ‘‘broadcasting facilities,’’ after 

10 ‘‘workshops,’’. 

11 (b) CRITICAL SERVICES DEFINED.—Section 

12 406(a)(3)(B) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

13 and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172(a)(3)(B)) 

14 is amended by striking ‘‘communications,’’ and inserting 

15 ‘‘communications (including broadcast and telecommuni16 cations),’’. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 553 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2665 

[Report No. 113–250] 

A BILL 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

disaster assistance, and for other purposes. bility for broadcasting facilities to receive certain and Emergency Assistance Act to provide eligiSEPTEMBER 8, 2014 

Reported without amendment 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Elza Woodard CLARK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 46410.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 27, 1973.

*84Weldon Holcomb, Tyler, for appellant.

Curtis Owen Dist. Atty., A1 Thigpen, Asst. Dist. Atty., Tyler, Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., and Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is driving while intoxicated, second offense; the punishment, three (3) years in the Department of Corrections.

The sole ground of error relates to the admission at the punishment hearing of a prior misdemeanor conviction for driving while intoxicated. The prior conviction was not alleged for jurisdictional purposes. Appellant contends the judgment did not affirmatively reflect that appellant had been represented by counsel.

An examination of the record in this cause fails to show that appellant at any time testified, or even claimed, that he was without counsel at the time of this prior conviction or that he was indigent and did not waive his right to counsel at the time of that conviction. His only claim is that the judgment and sentence do not affirmatively reflect that he was represented by counsel. In this regard it should be noted that the State’s Exhibit # 4, which is the record of the prior misdemeanor conviction in question, composed of some five pages, includes a two-page motion for continuance signed by one Tate McCain as attorney for appellant. This indicates that at some time during the pendency of that cause appellant was represented by counsel. Recently in Boss v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 489 S.W.2d 580, this Court said,

> “Appellant has the burden to show that he was without counsel or that he was indigent and did not voluntarily waive his right to counsel.”

See also Lott v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 480 S.W.2d 743; McComb v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 488 S.W.2d 105 (Concurring Opinion).

Burgett v. Texas, 389 U.S. 109, 88 S.Ct. 258, 19 L.Ed.2d 319, relied upon by appellant, is distinguishable, because in that case it was undisputed that the accused was not represented by counsel at the time of his prior convictions.

Reliance upon Wood v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 513, is also misplaced, since in that case the defendant contended that she had been indigent and without counsel at the time of her prior convictions. There is no such contention in the case before us here.

If, on the other hand, this Court was to assume that the prior conviction mentioned was void, we have concluded that its proof before the court without the intervention of a jury at the punishment phase of the trial would be harmless error in view of the fact that two prior felony convictions and two misdemeanors were also introduced at that hearing. See Vera v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 473 S.W.2d 22.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 99.8

CERTIFICATION

REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE
15d-14(b) AND

SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE
18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE



In connection with the
annual report of Claude Resources Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 (the
“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rick Johnson, C.A., Chief Financial
Officer and Vice President Finance of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated:    March 27, 2013

| | /s/ Rick Johnson
| | ----------------
| | Name:           
| | Title:          
| |
#### King *v.*Dowdall.

The statute permitted a non-resident plaintiff to sue in a justice’s court, by a short summons, having not less than two nor more than four days to run. He could also sue by the ordinary summons, having not less than six nor more than twelve days to run. Such a plaintiff sued by a summons returnable five days from its date. *Held,*that the justice had no jurisdiction to proceed in the suit.

Where Sunday is an intervening day, it is counted in computing statute time.

Sept. 27 ;

Sept. 30, 1848.

Cetiorari to one of the assistant justices courts. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

*T. E.*Tomlinson, for the plaintiff in error.

*G. A.*Curtis, for the defendant in error.

By the Court. Oakley, Ch. J.

Dowdall sued King in the court below by a summons, dated January 12th, and returnable January 17th, 1848. Dowdall was a non-resident, and the 16th day of January was Sunday. The defendant, at the return of the summons, appeared and moved that it be *132quashed and the suit dismissed, on the ground that it was returnable in five days.

The justice overruled the motion. The parties then joined issue, proceeded to trial, and the plaintiff recovered a judgment. The defendant seeks to reverse the judgment, both on the merits, and on the preliminary objection to the process.

We will first consider this objection. The law on the subject undoubtedly is, that a non-resident plaintiff may take out a short summons, having not less than two nor more than four days to run, or a long summons, having not less than six nor more than twelve days between its date and return. He has the option to take the one or the other, on giving the prescribed security, if he take the former. The difficulty here is, that the summons was neither long nor short. It is a summons of five days, if Sunday is to be counted as one.

The question then is, whether Sunday is to be counted in the computation of time on this process.

We know of no rule or principle by which it is to be excluded from the computation where it is an intermediate day, and we supposed the law on the subject was settled. The defend- . ant in error has brought to our notice the cases in the Massachusetts Reports, cited in Mr. Hill’s note to 2 Hill, 376. It suffices to say, that the rule indicated by those cases, is not the rule in this state, and whether those decisions were well founded or not, we cannot follow them. *(Ex parte*Dodge, 7 Cowen, 147; *Columbia Turnpike Road*v. Haywood, 10 Wend. 422 ; Anonymous, 2 Hill, 375, and note b., page 376.)

The law is established here that Sunday must be computed when it is an intermediate day, and the objection to the process is fatal. The court below was wrong in disregarding it, and the proceeding was without legitimate authority.

We have a discretion as. to costs *;*and as the error here was purely the act of the magistrate in the issuing of the summons, the judgment will be reversed without costs.

Judgment reversed.