alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Lowe, by Her Next Friend etc. et al. *v.*Gardner et al.

[No. 19,159.

Filed May 25, 1959.]

*528*Floyd E. Harper,*of Tipton, for appellants.

*Cole, Wildman & Cole*and *Russell J. Wildman,*of Peru, for appellees.

Cooper, C. J.

This matter comes before us on a Motion to Dismiss. It appearing from the record that on January 30, 1959, the appellants secured an extension of time in which to file his transcript of record and assignment of errors, the extended date going to and including April 28,1959.

Thereafter, on May 14, 1959, the appellants filed his petition praying for an additional extension of time in which to file a transcript, to which the appellees filed objections and also a Motion to Dismiss.

It is true that this court has inherent power to grant time to perfect an appeal even after the expiration of time allowed by the rules of the Supreme Court, or statute, for sufficient reason shown. See *State ex rel. Thomas*v. *Elkhart Circuit Ct.*(1950), 228 Ind. 572, 94 N. E. 2d 485; Flanagan, Wiltrout & Hamilton’s Indiana Trial and Appellate Practice, §2471, p. 193, as the appellants herein maintain.

*529A review of appellants’ petition shows no sufficient reason why the petition for extension of time in which to file the transcript of record and assignment of errors was not timely filed, as provided for by Rule 2-2 of the Supreme Court.

Inasmuch as the appellant did not file his petition for extension of time or the transcript of record and assignment of errors within the time heretofore allotted by the court this cause is now dismissed, at the costs of the appellants.

Note. — Reported in 158 N. E. 2d 808.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Jason Kulas, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2011-4 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2.
Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the
distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in
this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an
exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas.



/s/ Jason KulasName: Jason KulasTitle: Chief Financial OfficerDate: March 29, 2013
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 11 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 11

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
                  relating to voluntary school prayer.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 2007

   Mrs. Emerson introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
                  relating to voluntary school prayer.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is hereby proposed as 
an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution if 
ratified by the legislatures of at least three-fourths of the several 
States within seven years from the date of its proposal to the States 
by the Congress:

                              ``Article --

    ``Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to prohibit 
individual or group prayer in public schools or other public 
institutions. No person shall be required by the United States or by 
any State to participate in prayer. Neither the United States nor any 
State shall prescribe the content of any such prayer.''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                         0000772370
<NAME>                        FORMULA FOOTWEAR, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS


<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,676
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       4,268
<OTHER-SE>                                    (5,944)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               418
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (418)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.01)



</TABLE>
#### Vermillion et al. *v.*Gore et al.

[No. 19,017.

Filed March 21, 1958.

Rehearing dismissed April 18, 1958.]

*407
      *Harold J. Anderson, Ralph F. Mattingly, John D. Staggenburg,*all of Anderson, for appellants.

*William L. Peck,*of Anderson, for appellees.

Royse, P. J.

This is an attempt by appellants to appeal from a judgment of the trial court allowing appellees interest on a judgment in their favor on an oral implied contract for personal services.

At the outstart we are confronted with appellees’ contention that appellants have not complied with the provisions of Rule 2-17 (e), and have therefore not presented a question.

The pertinent portion of the above mentioned rule is as follows:

> “The brief shall contain under the heading ‘Argument’ a specification of such of the assigned errors as are intended to be urged, and each cause in the motion for a new trial which is intended to be urged. After each assignment of error relied upon — except the ruling on a motion for a new trial, and after each cause for a new trial relied upon, there shall be concisely stated the basis of the objection to the ruling complained of, exhibiting clearly the points of fact and of law being presented, and how they are applicable, citing the authorities and statutes relied upon, and setting out in substance the relevant parts of such statutes as are deemed to have an important bearing.”

Under the heading “Propositions, Points and Authorities” appellants devote about four pages of their brief to quotations from various authorities “without applying the same to any phase of the case or ruling involved or error relied upon.” Even under the rule prior to the 1950 amendment this would not present a question. I. L. E., Appeals, §386, p. 261, n. 14.

*408Under the heading of. “Argument” their brief does not cite any authority in support of their contention; it does not contain a statement of errors relied upon or the specifications of the motion for a new trial relied upon. Therefore, no question is presented. *Witte*v. *Witte et al.*(1953), 123 Ind. App. 644, 113 N. E. 2d 166; *Gdnsp. Wilson, etc.*v. *Johnson County National Bank of Franklin et al.*(1954), 125 Ind. App. 108, 109, 110, 122 N. E. 2d 628; *Mendenhall, Extr.*v. *Mendenhall*(1955), 125 Ind. App. 519, 124 N. E. 2d 873. (Transfer denied.)

Judgment affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 148 N. E. 2d 851.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Paul C. Honda, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Honda Auto Receivables 2011-2 Owner Trust
(the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);



2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken
as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and
other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act
periodic reports;



4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required
in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have
fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and



5. All the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and
15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of
noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.



In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably
relied on information provided to me by the unaffiliated party Citibank, National Association.







Date: June 17, 2013







|/s/ Paul C. Honda                                    | 
|---------------------------------------------------- | 
|Paul C. Honda                                        | 
|Vice President and Assistant Secretary              
|of American Honda Finance Corporation               
|(senior officer in charge of the servicing function)
[EXHIBIT 4.1]

                 SPECIMEN STOCK CERTIFICATE

Number _________                            Shares __________

     Incorporated under the Laws of the State of Florida

               UniPro Financial Services, Inc.
            Authorized to issue 70,000,000 shares

65,000,000 common shares    3,000,000 Series I Cnv Pfd shares
  par value $.001 each               par value $.001 each
                          2,000,000 No-Par Non designated Pfd

This certifies that _________________________________--______
is the owner of _____________________________________________
fully paid and
non-assessable  Shares  of  the  Common  Shares   of   UniPro
Financial  Services, Inc. transferable only on the  books  of
the  Corporation by the holder hereof in person  or  by  duly
authorized   Attorney  upon  surrender  of  this  Certificate
properly endorsed.
IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF, the said Corporation  has  caused  this
Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers  and
to be sealed with the Seal of the Corporation
                      this ______ day of _____-____ A.D._____


                      ---------------------------------------
                                                    President

                              [SEAL]

             (Reverse side of stock certificate)
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription  on
the  face  of this certificate, shall be construed as  though
they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations. Additional abbreviations may also be used though
not in the list.
TEN COM -- as tenants in common; TEN ENT -- as tenants by the
entireties;
JT TEN --as joint tenants with right  of survivorship and not
as tenants in common; UNIF GIFT MIN ACT -- ____________
Custodian _________ (Minor) under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act
______________ (State);

For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and
transfers   unto  ___________________________________________
(please insert social security or other identifying number of
assignee) _____________________.


_____________________________________________________________
 (please print or typewrite name and address of assignee)
________________________________ Shares  represented  by  the
within  Certificate, and hereby irrevocably  constitutes  and
appoints   __________________________________   Attorney   to
transfer  the  said shares on the books of  the  within-named
Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.

Dated, ___________________     ______________________________

Medallion Signature Guarantee Required


NOTICE: The signature to this assignment must correspond with
the name as written upon the face of the certificate in every
particular without alteration or enlargement, or any change
whatever.


<PAGE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 180 (Friday, September 17, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23195]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 2

[Docket No. FDA-2006-N-0304] (formerly Docket No. 2006N-0262)
RIN 0910-AF93


Use of Ozone-Depleting Substances; Removal of Essential-Use 
Designation (Flunisolide, etc.); Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a final 
rule that appeared in the Federal Register of April 14, 2010 (75 FR 
19213). The document amended FDA's regulation on the use of ozone-
depleting substances (ODSs) in self-pressurized containers to remove 
the essential-use designations for flunisolide, triamcinolone, 
metaproterenol, pirbuterol, albuterol and ipratropium in combination, 
cromolyn, and nedocromil used in oral pressurized metered-dose inhalers 
(MDIs). The document was published with an inadvertent error. This 
document corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Diane Sullivan, Office of Policy, 
Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 
3210, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-9171.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2010-8467, appearing on page 
19213, in the Federal Register of Wednesday, April 14, 2010, the 
following correction is made:
    1. On page 19213, in the third column, the heading ``RIN 0910-
AF92'' is corrected to read ``RIN 0910-AF93''.

    Dated: September 13, 2010.
David Dorsey,
Acting Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning and Budget.
[FR Doc. 2010-23195 Filed 9-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
#### J. B. Johnson v. N. & R. Dowling.

(No. 1567, Op. Book No. 2, p. 354.)

Appeal from Bandera County.

Opinion by

Walker, R. S., P. J.

§ 1090. *Judgment by default; effect of; writ of inquiry.*A judgment by default admits every averment in the petition except the amount of damages. [4 Tex. 381; 11 Tex. 18; 16 Tex. 549; 17 Tex. 437; 21 Tex. 480.] A writ ■of inquiry to assess damages seems formerly to have been necessary, but under the present jury system, unless a jury is demanded, the judge will determine all necessary facts required to be ascertained in order to assess the ■damages.

§ 1091. *Judgment íy defaidt; will be set aside, when.*A judgment by default will be set aside, or the judgment arrested, if the allegations of the petition are not set forth with such substantial accuracy, or with sufficient certainty, as to inform the court what judgment to render without looking for information to proofs not within the allegations, or where the petition shows no cause of •action. [Hall v. Jackson, 3 Tex. 305; Johnson v. Davis, 7 Tex. 173.]

§ 1092. *Affidavit in sequestration or attachment may be referred to in aid of the petition, on general demurrer.*The affidavit filed with the petition in a sequestration or attachment suit is so far a part of the petition as to allow, on general demurrer, a reference to it, when the facts stated in it have reference to the allegations in regard to the same facts contained in the petition.

*616June 8, 1881.

§ 1093. *Arrest of judgment; grounds of.*As a general rule, a judgment may be arrested upon motion for matter intrinsic upon the face of the record, amounting to a defect which could be reached by general demurrer. It is not, however, every defect which would have been fatal on demurrer that can be reached by a motion in arrest of judgment. If the issue joined be such as necessarily required on the trial proof of the facts so defectively or imperfectly stated, such defect, imperfection or omission is cured by the verdict. [9 Tex. 239; 22 Tex. 405; 28 Tex. 610; 2 Tex. 206; 26 Tex. 76; Gould’s Pl. 65.]

§ 1094. *Demurrer; construction of pleading on general exceptions.*In passing upon a general exception to a pleading, every reasonable intendment arising upon such pleading shall be indulged in favor of its sufficiency.

Affirmed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000774454
<NAME> U.S. MICROBICS 
        EXHIBIT 27 - FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                     MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         15,232
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                        253,534
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                               2,475
<CURRENT-ASSETS                 <271,741>
<PP&E>                                          37,792
<DEPRECIATION>                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       309,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           75,772
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0
<PREFERRED>                               8,574
<COMMON>                                       162
<OTHER-SE>                                         0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 309,533
<SALES>                                                0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  259,124
<CGS>                                                 193 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      198,601
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    49,809
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        10,521
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              10,521
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                              10,521
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0
        

</TABLE>