alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Louis Seeligson et al. v. De Witt County.

(No. 1430, Op. Book No. 2, p. 660.)

Appeal from De Witt County.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 820. *Bond for the hire of a county convict; rules in relation io statutory bonds.*De Witt county recovered judgment against appellants upon a bond executed by them for the hire of a county convict. It is contended by appellants that the bond is not in conformity with the statute, and is void. While there are defects in the bond, they are not of such a character as to vitiate it and release the appellants from liability. Two of the condi*470tions provided by the statute for such bonds are omitted, viz., those mentioned in subdivisions 3 and 4 of article 3604, Rev. Stats. In all other respects the bond is in substantial compliance with the statute. It is a general rule that statutory bonds, when directed to be. made in a particular mode, must be made in pursuance with that mode; but this rule is subject to modifications. It is laid down that, to render a bond void for want of conformity to a statute, it must be made so by express enactment or must be intended as a fraud on the obligors, by color of law, by an evasion of the statute [Janes v. Reynolds, 2 Tex. 250.], or be more onerous than is required by the statute. [Johnson v. Erskine, 9 Tex. 1.] In the present case the omission of the two conditions mentioned renders the bond less onerous upon the obligors than required by statute, and certainly they cannot be heard to complain that for this reason the bond is void. [Justices v. Wynn, Dudley (Ga. R.), 22.]

January 10, 1883.

Affirmed.
#### L. G. Cockrum v. E. L. McCracken.

(No. 35, Op. Book No. 3, p. 215.)

Error from Guadalupe County.

May 5, 1880.

Opinion by

Clark, J.

§ 65. *Married woman;• not chargeable on note as member of a firm.*Husband and wife cannot be partners in mercantile business, and the wife is not liable upon a note executed by such a mercantile firm. [Wallace & Co. v. Finberg, 46 Tex. 35.]

§ 66. *Community debt; defense against by surviving wife.*In a suit against the surviving wife upon a community debt, if the property received by her from the husband’s estate is exempt property, it is incumbent upon her to so allege and prove, as these are matters purely defensive. [Ross v. O’Neil, 45 Tex. 599.]

Affirmed.
### UNITED STATES NAVY

- MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Before

R.Q. WARD, J. MCFARLANE, G.G. GERDING

Appellate Military Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

COREY J. HOLIFIELD

LANCE CORPORAL (E

- 3), U.S. MARINE CORPS

NMCCA 2 01300382

SPECIAL COURT

- MARTIAL

**Sentence Adjudged:** 18 July 2013.

**Military Judge:** LtCol Elizabeth Harvey, USMC.

**Convening Authority:** Commanding Officer, Security and

Emergency Services Battalion, Marine Corps Base, Camp

Pendleton, Ca.

**Staff Judge Advo cate's Recommendation:**  LtCol P.A. Tafoya,

USMC

. **For Appellant:** CAPT Stephen White, JAGC, USN.

**For Appellee:** Mr. Brian Keller , Esq

.

**30 January 2014**

**---------------------------------------------------**

**OPINION OF THE COURT**

**---------------------------- -----------------------** 

After careful consideration of the record, submitted

without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence

as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform

Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL

Clerk of Court
News United States Air Force
 Four-legged Airmen acclimate to airpowerPublished July 9, 2014
                        
                        By Senior Airman Melanie Bulow-Gonterman
                        
                        
                        6th Air Mobility Wing Public Affairs
                **CLEARWATER, Fla. (AFNS) --**
                The 6th Security Forces Squadron military working dog section teamed up with the U.S. Coast Guard to familiarize four MWD's with being in the presence of and flying in a helicopter, June 30, at Air Station Clearwater, Florida.The experience allowed the handlers to evaluate their four-legged partners' reactions when riding in, as well as, jumping in and out of a helicopter.Conditioning a dog prior to a deployment is crucial. This reassures handlers they can depend on their partner to perform under hectic circumstances."The sound of the chopper is extremely loud, and when this is added to the sensitive hearing of a dog along with the high altitudes, a dog could respond negatively," said Senior Airman Tyler Sexton, a 6th SFS MWD handler. "By exposing a dog to this, we are using successive approximation to get the dog acclimated to the noise and high altitudes. Having a calm dog in combat makes the mission easier and safer."Of the four working dog teams in the training session, two had never been around helicopters.Sexton, who coordinated the training with the Coast Guard, stated that this was the first time the 6th SFS MWD section conducted training with Coast Guardsmen -- but will not be the last. Due to the positive feedback, future training has already been scheduled to expose the remaining seven dogs to the loud noise and high altitude training.The MWD section at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, is known for conducting training with various agencies, from local police departments to the Drug Enforcement Administration."Looking outside of the box when it comes to training is not only fun but also a good learning experience for both agencies," Sexton said. "The more we share tactics and training, the better we will all be."K-9 



U.S. Coast Guard 



MacDill Air Force Base 



MWD
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 99.4
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Conrad Nagel, Principal Accounting Officer of U.S. Microbics, Inc. and
Subsidiaries (the "registrant"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of U.S. Microbics, Inc.
and Subsidiaries;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: February 28, 2003


/S/   CONRAD NAGEL
----------------------------
CONRAD NAGEL
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20911 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. DERRICK KEEFEN MEDCALF Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-479 Before KING, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Derrick Keefen Medcalf has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with A nders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Medcalf has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D February 20, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 57479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23475]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection


Accreditation and Approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, 
as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America 
Corporation, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 
CFR 151.13, Inspectorate America Corporation, 37 Panagrossi Circle, 
East Haven, CT 06512, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test 
petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance 
with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing 
to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger 
services should request and receive written assurances from the entity 
that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. 
Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service 
this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The 
inquiry may also be sent to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#36555446185a57545e4776525e4518515940"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dbb8b9abf5b7bab9b3aa9bbfb3a8f5bcb4ad">[email protected]</span></a>. Please reference the 
website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and 
accredited laboratories. http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import/operations--
support/labs--scientific--svcs[sol]commercial--gaugers[sol].

DATES: The accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America 
Corporation, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on 
May 7, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for 
May 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Malana, Laboratories and 
Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-
1060.

    Dated: September 13, 2010.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
[FR Doc. 2010-23475 Filed 9-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED) FOR COMMERCE NATIONAL
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARY DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND DECEMBER 31, 1997
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       5,826,251
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             3,250,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 12,597,191
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      12,597,191
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        12,597,191
<LOANS>                                    115,762,187
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,222,103
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             143,229,284
<DEPOSITS>                                 126,264,585
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,168,134
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            633,649
<LONG-TERM>                                  2,365,498
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        74,282
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,560,699
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             143,229,284
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,579,546
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              201,560
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               115,077
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,896,183
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           3,401,250
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,268,971
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,627,212
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   97,253
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                896,184
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                633,775
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     633,775
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   433,739
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.60
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   0.047
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,151,183
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                86,137
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              3,514,765
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,130,371
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  (9,675)
<RECOVERIES>                                     4,154
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,222,103
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         1,222,103
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        911,250
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 179 (Thursday, September 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 56516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23276]


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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: Vol. 75, No. 175, 
Friday, September 10, 2010, page 55312.

Previously Announced Time and Date of Meeting: 10 a.m.-11 a.m., 
Wednesday September 15, 2010.

Changes in Meeting: Meeting postponed to September 22, 2010, 10 a.m.-11 
a.m. For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

Contact Person for Additional Information: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of 
the Secretary, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814 (301) 504-
7923.

    Dated: September 14, 2010.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23276 Filed 9-14-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
VANGUARD CELLULAR SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 CALCULATION OF FULLY DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE

(Amounts in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                               THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                1997                 1996
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                                          <C>                  <C>      
Net Income                                                                   $     228            $   2,621
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Weighted average number of common shares outstanding                            40,824               41,313

Adjustments necessary to reflect weighted average number
  of common shares outstanding on a fully diluted basis                             57                1,057
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                40,881               42,370
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fully diluted earnings per share                                              $    0.01           $     0.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>
#### E. & J. Stone v. E. & J. Martin.

(No. 683, Op. Book No. 3, p. 445.)

Error from Johnson County.

February 2, 1881.

Opinion by

Winkler, J.

§ 87. *Jurisdiction; transfer of case.*When a suit was pending in the district court at the time of the enactment of the law organizing the county courts, of which suit the county court, under the new law, had jurisdiction, it was held that the jurisdiction of the district court over said suit, to issue process therein, continued until an order was made therein transferring the case to the county court.

Affirmed.
[No. 23837-3-II.

Division Two.

May 19, 2000.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Brian Patrick Brice, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 98-1-00303-1, Roger A. Bennett, J., entered October 21, 1998. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, J, concurred in by Morgan and Bridgewater, JJ.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 82 (Wednesday, May 17, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5174]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Brownback] is recognized for 5 minutes.

  [Mr. BROWNBACK addressed the House. His remarks will appear hereafter 
in the Extensions of Remarks.]

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 85 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D643]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        House of Representatives

Chamber Action
Reports Filed: Reports were filed as follows:
  H.R. 1561, to consolidate the foreign affairs agencies of the United 
States; to authorize appropriations for the Department of State and 
related agencies for fiscal year 1996 and 1997; to responsibly reduce 
the authorizations of appropriations for United States foreign 
assistance programs for fiscal years 1996 and 1997, amended (H. Rept. 
104-128, Part 1, filed May 19); and
  H. Res. 155, providing for the consideration of H.R. 1561, American 
Overseas Interests Act of 1995 (H. Rept. 104-129).
Pages H5373-74
Speaker Pro Tempore: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he 
designates Representative Kim to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
  Page H5369
Recess: House recessed at 12:30 p.m. and reconvened at 4 p.m.
  Page H5371
Referral: One Senate-passed measure was referred to the appropriate 
House committee.
  Page H5373
Senate Messages: Messages received from the Senate today appear on page 
H5369.
Quorum Calls--Votes: No quorum calls or votes developed during the 
proceedings of the House today.
Adjournment: Met at noon and adjourned at 4:17 p.m.
  Page H5373
```
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ NO
. 09 -23- 00146
- CR NO
. 09 -23- 00147
- CR

__________________ MITCHELL DALE FORTIN , Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery Count y , Texas Trial Cause No s. 21
- 06
- 08504
- CR, 21
- 06
- 08514
- CR

__________________________________________________________________ MEMORAN DUM OPINION A jury found Appellant Mitchell Dale Fortin guilty of the first

- degree felony offense of c ontinuous sexual abuse of a child and the second

- degree felony offense of i ndecency with a child by contact

. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 21.02 (b) , (h) ; 21.11 (a)(1) , (d)

. The jury a ssessed Fortin’s punishment at thirty

- five years of imprisonment for the offense of continuous sexual abuse of a child and at twenty2 years of imprisonment for the offense of indecency with a child. The trial court granted the State’s Motion to Cumulate Sentence and ordered the sentences to run consecutively. On appeal, Fortin ’s appellate counsel filed Anders brief s that present counsel’s professional evaluation of the record s and concludes the appeal s are frivolous. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On November 17, 2023 , we granted an extension of time for Fortin to file pro se brief s , and Fortin filed no response s
. Upon receiving the Anders briefs, this Court must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the appeal s are wholly frivolous. P enson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988) (citing Anders , 386 U.S. at 744). We have reviewed the entire records and counsel’s briefs, and we have found nothing that would arguably support the appeals. Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2 005) (“Due to the nature of Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion that it considered the issues raised in the briefs and reviewed the record for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate
Pro cedure 47.1.”)

. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new3 counsel to re

- brief the appeals. Cf. Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgments. 1
AFFIRMED.

W. SCOTT GOLEMON Chief Justice

Submitted on February 26, 2024 Opinion Delivered February 28, 2024 Do Not Publish Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Wright, JJ.

1 Fortin may challenge o u r decision in these case s by filing a petition of discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.