alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The City of Galveston v. Patrick Murphy.

(No. —, Tex. L. J., vol. 2, p. 570.)

Appeal from Galveston County.

Opinion by

Winkler, J.

§ 732. *Policeman's salary; reduction of after commencement of employment.*Where a policeman employed by the year at $100 per month was duly notified of the passage of a resolution by the council reducing the pay of such employees to $75 per month, and afterwards con*401tinued in the service, drawing and receipting for the latter sum each month until the end of his term, and entered no protest against the amount, nor claimed any greater pay, *held*that, by his acts and by his silence, he acquiesced in the acts of the city council reducing his pay to $75' per month, and could not go behind such acquiescence and recover a larger sum for his services. [Dillon qn Municipal Corp. §§ 169, 170; 2 Pars, on Cont. 792 et seq. note 5, p. 795; Welland Canal Co. v. Hathaway, 8 Wend. 481.]

March 14, 1879.

Reversed and rendered.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND
AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                    0000919602
<NAME> HELSINKI CAPITAL PARTNERS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                    1
<CURRENCY>                      US dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Mar-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 Apr-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1997
<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>                          2,297
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,246
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,543)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  59
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (59)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (59)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (59)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.00)


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 10-7372

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff – Appellee, 

 v. 

CLEVELAND MCLEAN, JR., 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior

District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5; 2:08-cv-00588-RGD) 

Submitted: April 14, 2011 Decided: April 28, 2011 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Cleveland McLean, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Neil H. MacBride, 

United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

Certiorari dismissed, October 3, 2011
2

PER CURIAM:

Cleveland McLean, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) motion. We previously 

remanded the case for further consideration of McLean’s motion. 

The district court reconsidered the motion and again denied it. 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. United States v. McLean, Nos. 2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5; 

2:08-cv-00588-RGD (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 13 and entered Sept. 14, 

2010). We grant McLean’s motion to supplement his informal 

brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
News United States Air Force
 Texas ROTC cadet is top in nationPublished Sept. 4, 2014
                        
                        By 1st Lt. Nathaniel Roesler
                        
                        
                        17th Training Wing Public Affairs
                **SAN ANGELO, Texas (AFNS) --**
                The Air Force Association named Cadet Dylan J. Meador of Angelo State University's Air Force ROTC Detachment 847 the Outstanding ROTC Cadet of the Year for 2014.
The AFA annually chooses one cadet from 13,400 nationally, based on academic achievement, physical excellence and military performance.
Detachment 847 selected Meador as the top ROTC cadet and put him up against the best cadets from the Southwest region, comprising of 36 schools. Once he won the regional award, he was compared to the best from the entire country and was selected as the top cadet.
Meador will attend an awards ceremony Sept. 15, hosted by the AFA in National Harbor, Maryland. The AFA is a nonprofit, independent professional military and aerospace education organization. 
Meador sees this honor as a team effort.
"The detachment itself has an atmosphere that inspires people to go above and beyond," Meador said. "I had great mentoring from upperclassmen who set me up for success by challenging me constantly and continually pushing me out of my comfort zone."
Col. Jeffrey F. Staha, the Southwest region ROTC commander, said he agrees that Detachment 847 at Angelo State had a big impact on Meador being named cadet of the year.
"By his achievements and actions, Cadet Meador exemplifies excellence in every aspect of his academic and cadet life," Staha said. "He models the behaviors we want in our officers, and he has learned this at Detachment 847."
The award-winning cadet is also a leader in his home detachment.
"He's always been a go-to cadet," said Lt. Col. Pedro E. Matos, ASU Air Force ROTC Detachment 847 commander. "Cadet Meador (is) also a team player that younger cadets look up to."
Meador has been selected to attend pilot training after graduation and already has his private pilot's license. He hasn't been assigned a location, but said he knows which state he'd like to train in.
"There are a few bases for pilot training, and I'd like to go to one of the bases in Texas," Meador said.AFA 



Air Force Association 



cadet 



ROTC 



Angelo State University
ex4c.htm












NUVOLA, INC.


 





	
Certificate

	  	
Shares


	  	  	  







 







INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA







TOTAL AUTHORIZED ISSUE


100,000,000 SHARES PAR VALUE $0.001 EACH


COMMON STOCK


 


 


THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ________________________________________ IS THE OWNER OF _________________________________________________________________________ FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE ABOVE CORPORATION 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 WITNESS, THE SEAL OF THE CORPORATION AND THE SIGNATURES OF ITS DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICERS.


 


 


DATED ____________________


 


SECRETARY ____________________ PRESIDENT______________________
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 83 (Thursday, May 18, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5231]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              THE JOURNAL

  The SPEAKER. The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's 
proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof.
  Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a 
vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.
  The SPEAKER. The question is on the Chair's approval of the Journal.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, further proceedings on 
this motion will be postponed until later this afternoon.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________
```
#### H. R. Newman v. W. A. J. McCallum.

(No. 2298, R. Book No. 4, p. 241.)

Error from Dallas County.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 273. *Jurisdiction; amount in controversy as determined by plea in reconvention.*Where plaintiff sued in county court on a note for $725, and defendant pleaded in reconvention two separate, distinct and independent claims for damages, aggregating $2,000, a sum beyond the jurisdiction of the county court [Const, art. V, sec. 16; Rev. Stats, art. 1162], *held,*that the damages *112claimed by defendant in his plea in reconvention is *“*the amount in controversy ” so far as his plea is concerned, and the court erred in entertaining jurisdiction of the plea. The plea in reconvention is a cross action by a defendant.

October 28, 1882.

§ 274. *Jurisdiction; want of, fatal as fundamental error.*Where the question of jurisdiction is not raised, still the want of jurisdiction in the court trying a case must always be noticed, and is always fatal whether complained of or not. [Tarbox v. Kennon, 3 Tex. 7; Graham v. Roder, 5 Tex. 146; Austin v. Jordan, 5 Tex. 130; Evans v. Pigg, 28 Tex. 590; Able v. Bloomfield, 6 Tex. 263; Bridge v. Ballew, 11 Tex. 269.]

§ 275. *Practice in county court; where plea in reconvention exceeds in amount its jurisdiction.*Where defendant’s plea in reconvention was for an amount beyond the jurisdiction of the county court, this court reversed and remanded the cause, with instructions to the court below to dismiss the plea in reconvention, granting defendant leave, however, should he ask it, to again plead in reconvention for an amount within the jurisdiction of the court.

Reversed and remanded.
News United States Air Force
 ANG unveils new senior enlisted leader management officePublished May 13, 2014
                        
                        By Senior Airman John E. Hillier III
                        
                        
                        Air National Guard Readiness Center Public Affairs
                **VOLK FIELD COMBAT READINESS TRAINING CENTER, Wis. (AFNS) --**
                The Senior Enlisted Leader Management Office was unveiled by Air National Guard Command Chief Master Sgt. James W. Hotaling to the state and wing command chiefs during the annual Command Chief's Huddle held here May 11-12.
The office was instituted in order to ensure that Air National Guard senior enlisted leaders receive the same opportunities for development offered to the active component, so that the ANG's voice can be heard throughout the Air Force.
"We would say 'a chief's a chief,' except our development is not the same as our active peers," said Senior Master Sgt. Darin Mauzy, the SELMO supervisor. "SELMO will help open those doors."
The position of command chief master sergeant is assigned Air Force Specialty Code 9E000, and carries with it specific training requirements and a need for functional oversight. SELMO seeks to ensure that these administrative tasks are accomplished and Guardsmen are not prevented from pursuing development opportunities.
"Half of the command chiefs in the entire Air Force are in the ANG," said Mauzy. "So if we make up half of the chiefs, then we should be developing appropriately along with our peers. For the first time, we're doing that. In 2012, we had 11 chief master sergeants go to a national-level school. This year, we are at 78 right now ... by 2016, we'll make sure we are one for one on development opportunities with our active counterpart."
It's not only chiefs who will benefit from SELMO. All senior non-commissioned officers will see expanded opportunities open up for them.
"The important thing is that we are filling so many school slots right now that we're running out of command chiefs to send," said Hotaling. "So then, we'll start sending all chiefs, and then senior master sergeants and master sergeants to these national level schools."
Active-duty leadership is eager to have experienced Guard chiefs step up to serve in their organizations.
"In the last 12 months, we have had ANG command chiefs interview for two major commands," said Hotaling. "We have command chiefs who are sitting at joint task forces right now. The Air Force right now has five active-duty wings that want Air National Guard command chiefs. It's catching on like wildfire."senior enlisted 



leader 



management 



Air National Guard
News United States Air Force
 Readout of US Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. CQ Brown, Jr.’s Global Air and Space Chiefs’ Conference speechPublished July 19, 2022
                        
                        
                        Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **ARLINGTON, Va. (AFNS) --**
                Air Force **Chief of Staff Gen. CQ Brown, Jr.** recently delivered his keynote speech at the Global Air and Space Chiefs’ Conference held July 13-15 at IET, Savory Place, London.

The conference brought together leaders in air and space power, industry and technology, and experts from academia to discuss this year’s theme of “Maintaining Our Leading Edge,” which focused on retaining the U.S. Air and Space Forces and international partners’ operational advantage over potential adversaries.

The conference’s core topics included: Operational Integration; Technological Adaptation; Digital, Data and Information; Ethics and Morals; Sustainability and Skills.

Brown’s speech can be read **here**.FS 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



Gen. CQ Brown 



Jr. 



CSAF 



Air Force Chief of Staff 



keynote 



GASCC 



Speech 



London 



Global Air and Space Chiefs' Conference Related Links
        CSAF GASCC Keynote
EXHIBIT 34.7




logo

Plante & Moran, PLLC

Suite 2700

225 W. Washington St.

Chicago, IL 60606

Tel: 312.899.4460

Fax: 312.726.3262

plantemoran.com


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Board of Directors


National Tax Search, LLC


We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Assessment of Compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that National Tax Search, LLC (the “Company”) complied with certain servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Security and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the National Tax Search TaxQ system (the “Platform”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012. The Company has determined that only certain servicing criteria, 1122(d)(l)(ii), 1122(d)l(iv), 1122(d)2(ii), 1122(d)2(v), 1122(d)2(vi), 1122(d)2(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), and 1122(d)(4)(xii), are applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by this report. The Company has determined that the remaining servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the SEC Regulation AB are not applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by this report.


Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included a selection of a sample of transactions and compliance activities related to the Platform during the examination period and determining whether the Company processed those transactions and performed those activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Our testing of selected transactions and compliance activities was limited to calculations, reports, and activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures did not include determining whether errors may have occurred prior to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.


In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012 for the Platform is fairly stated in all material respects.





Chicago, IL


February 8, 2013
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: USAFA Graduation, New Appearance Policies, Candy Bomber HonoredPublished June 3, 2022
                        
                        By Tech. Sgt. Eric Mann
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                In this week’s look around the Air Force, the Air Force Academy’s Class of 2022 graduated with a commencement address from Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, Dress and Appearance policies get new updates, and Col. Gail Halvorsen is remembered as the Berlin Airlift’s much-loved “Candy Bomber.” (Hosted by Tech. Sgt. Brittain Crolley)



For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.
Related links:**- ‘Power of partnerships’: SECDEF gives commencement speech to AF Academy’s Class of 2022****- Air Force announces new mustache policy, sister service and joint unit patch update****- C-17 Globemaster III dedicated in honor of ‘Candy Bomber,’ Berlin Airlift**Featured Video 



AFTV 



ATAF 



Around the Air Force 



Air Force 



AF 



Candy Bomber 



USAFA 



SecDEF 



Uniform Policy
#### John H. Harrison v. State Central Bank.

(No. 2801, Op. Book No. 4.)

Appeal from McLennan County.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 375. *Usury; plea of, and waiver of.*A party wish-’ ing to avail himself of the defense of usury in a contract, can only do so by pleading it specially in a plea verified by his affidavit. [Eev. Stats, arts. 2081, 1205.] This defense is a personal privilege which may bo waived; and where a party who is entitled to set it up does not do so, but appears and answers by pleading other matters of defense, it is an implied waiver on his part of the defense of usury, and the usurious nature of the contract will not be considered, even when it is apparent upon the face of the contract. [Moseley v. Smith, 21 Tex. 441; 7 Wait’s Act. & Def. 624, sec. 16, 628, sec. 17; Tyler on Usury, 458 et seq.]

§ 376. *Judgment for more than the legal rate of interest.*It was error in the court below to make the judgment bear interest at the rate of two per cent, per month as stipulated in the contract, this being a greater rate of interest than is allowed by law. . [Eev. Stats, art. 2980.] But this error can be cured by filing in this court a *remittitur*of the excessive interest.

§ 377. *Account boohs as evidence.*Where H. swore positively to a payment for which he had never received credit, which evidence was only met by Eogers’ books, which showed no entry of the transaction, Eogers *160himself knowing nothing about the payment; and it was in proof that Rogers’ bookkeeper, who was dead, was addicted to the use of morphine and chloroform; that mistakes in said books had been discovered and admitted to be mistakes by Rogers, *held,*that the proof failed to show that the books were correctly kept, and, in the absence of other evidence establishing their correctness, should not be regarded as evidence.

June 2, 1883.

Reversed and remanded.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED) FOR COMMERCE NATIONAL CORPORATION
AND SUBSIDIARY DATED MARCH 31, 1997 AND DECEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,369,941
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       3,611,182
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             4,250,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 14,887,520
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         190,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           191,310
<LOANS>                                     88,564,096
<ALLOWANCE>                                    912,959
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             118,199,489
<DEPOSITS>                                 104,201,581
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,218,735
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          3,090,079
<LONG-TERM>                                    318,192
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        61,759
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,309,143
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             118,199,489
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              1,985,842
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              244,658
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                23,046
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,253,546
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             972,445
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,035,664
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,217,882
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   36,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,012,318
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                322,260
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     322,260
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   201,763
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   0.046
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,409,556
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                10,536
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              1,659,923
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               887,803
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   13,547
<RECOVERIES>                                     2,703
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              912,959
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           912,959
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        568,904
        

</TABLE>