alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Brown Manufacturing Co. v. S. H. Watson.

(No. 2701.)

Appeal from Ellis County.

M. B. Templeton, counsel for appellant.

A. A. Kemble, counsel for appellee

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 329. *Sequestration; quashal of, does not dispose of the suit when; case stated.*Appellee brought this suit in justice’s court to recover of appellant a phaeton or its value, $110. He sued out a writ of sequestration for the phaeton. In justice’s court the sequestration was *397quashed and the suit was dismissed. Appellee appealed to the county court, the sequestration proceeding was quashed and dismissed, but appellee recovered a judgment against appellant for the phaeton or its value, 8105, and costs. *Held,*the suit was properly treated in the county court as an action for the recovery of the phaeton or its value, and the quashal of the sequestration proceedings did not dispose of the suit upon its merits.

November 23, 1887.

§ 330. *Custodia legis; case overruled; case stated.*Appellant had purchased the phaeton in question from Ousley & Go., and on the same day of the purchase it was seized under attachments issued against the property of Ousley & Go. Appellant filed claimant’s oath and bond to try the right of property to the phaeton, and said proceeding was pending at the time appellee instituted this suit. Appellant pleaded specially in this suit that the phaeton wras *in custodia legis,*which plea was overruled. *Held,*the question of *custodia legis*was eliminated from the case by the quashal of the sequestration proceeding. But, even if it was not, the phaeton was not *in custodia legis,*under the decision of our supreme court in Frieberg, Kleiss & Co. v. Elliott & Wright, 64 Tex. 367, which holds that property in the hands of a claimant,, who has made the oath and given the bond required for the trial of the right of property, is not *in custodia legis.*This court held a contrary doctrine in the case of Le Gierse & Co. v. Pierce, 2 App. C. C. § 89; but that decision, for the sake of harmony, is overruled.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 129 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 129

 To direct the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to 
designate New Jersey Task Force 1 as part of the National Urban Search 
                           and Rescue System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2007

 Mr. Frelinghuysen (for himself, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Saxton, 
Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Pascrell, and Mr. Rothman) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to 
designate New Jersey Task Force 1 as part of the National Urban Search 
                           and Rescue System.

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

SECTION 1. ADDITION OF TEAM TO NATIONAL URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE SYSTEM.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
            (1) The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, 
        demonstrated the importance of enhancing national domestic 
        terrorism preparedness.
            (2) 26 of the 28 urban search and rescue teams included in 
        the National Urban Search and Rescue System of the Federal 
        Emergency Management Agency were called into action in the wake 
        of the events of September 11th.
            (3) Highly-qualified, urban search and rescue teams not 
        included in the National Urban Search and Rescue System were 
        the first teams in New York City on September 11th.
            (4) The continuing threat of a possible domestic terrorist 
        attack remains an important mission for which the Nation must 
        prepare to respond.
            (5) Part of that response should be to increase the number 
        of urban search and rescue teams included in the National Urban 
        Search and Rescue System.
    (b) Addition of New Jersey Task Force 1.--The Director of the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency shall designate New Jersey Task 
Force 1 as part of the National Urban Search and Rescue System.
                                 <all>
```
News United States Air Force
 DOD continues aid to combat wildfires in NorthwestPublished Aug. 13, 2014
                **PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. (AFNS) --**
                Two Defense Department C-130 Hercules equipped with U.S. Forest Service Modular Airborne Fire Fighting Systems, or MAFFS, and under the command and control of U.S. Northern Command are assisting with wildfire suppression efforts in the Northwest, Great Basin, and elsewhere in the West at the request of the National Interagency Fire Center, or NIFC, in Boise, Idaho.
Since July 20, DOD aircraft have conducted 124 air drops and discharged more than 244,100 gallons of fire retardant, officials said. 
Within the last 24 hours, crews conducted seven airdrops over fires in Idaho: two airdrops at the Arrow fire, discharging about 3,000 gallons of retardant, and five at the Koke fire, discharging about 11,500 gallons of retardant. 
The supporting unit flying the MAFFS mission is Wyoming Air National Guard’s 153rd Airlift Wing, located in Cheyenne, Wyoming. 
Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard C-130s assigned to units in California, Colorado, North Carolina and Wyoming are capable of dropping fire retardant using U.S. Forest Service MAFFS units. Aircrews, maintenance crews and support personnel undergo special NIFC training and certification to perform missions each year. *(Information courtesy of a U.S. Northern Command news release)*MAAFS 



Colorado 



firefighting 



fire 



C-130 



wildfire
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Of Periodic Financial Report Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,  18 U.S.C. Section 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Capital Income Properties, LtdSeries XI (the
Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of Donald J. Liebentritt, as President and Chief Executive Officer
of First Capital Financial, L.L.C., the General Partner of the Partnership (the General Partner), and Philip Tinkler, as Vice PresidentFinance and Treasurer of the General Partner, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (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 result of operations of the Partnership.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    DONALD J. LIEBENTRITTDONALD J. LIEBENTRITTPresident and Chief Executive OfficerNovember 12, 2003/s/    PHILIP TINKLERPHILIP TINKLERVice PresidentFinance and TreasurerNovember 12, 2003
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 92 (Wednesday, June 7, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1170]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           DRUG LEGALIZATION--THE MORAL EQUIVALENT OF GENOCIDE

                                 ______

                        HON. GERALD B.H. SOLOMON

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, June 7, 1995
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's top drug enforcement official, 
Lee Brown, recently gave an important speech on drug legalization. 
While some liberals and libertarians would have you believe that 
legalization is a viable alternative to the war on drugs, Mr. Brown 
makes it very clear that drug legalization will never occur in the 
United States.
         Lee Brown's ``Why the U.S. Will Never Legalize Drugs''

       When we look at the plight of many of our youth today, 
     especially African American males, I do not think it is an 
     exaggeration to say that legalizing drugs would be the moral 
     equivalent of genocide.
  Making addictive, mind altering drugs legal is an invitation to 
disaster for our communities that are already under siege.
  Without laws that make drug use illegal, some experts estimate that 
we could easily have three times as many Americans using cocaine and 
crack--the proponents of legalization would have us believe that crime 
would go down if drug use was legal, but an honest look at the facts 
belie this argument.
  Statistic tell us that almost half of those arrested for committing a 
crime test positive for the use of drugs at the time of their arrest. 
Making drugs more readily available could only propel more individuals 
into a life of crime and violence. Contrary to what the legalization 
proponents say, profit is not the only reason for the high rates of 
crime and violence that are associated with the drug trade * * * drugs 
are illegal because they are harmful--to both body and mind.
  Those who can least afford further hardship in their lives would be 
much worse off if drug were legalized.

                          ____________________
```
#### Munchel et al. *v.*City of Batesville et al.

[No. 19,591.

Filed April 27, 1961.]

*McCarty & O’Connor,*of Brookville, *Murray, Man-non, Fairchild & Stewart*and *Samuel A. Fuller,*both of Indianapolis, for appellants.

*Paul V. Wycoff,*of Batesville, for appellees.

Ax, C. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing a remonstrance filed in the lower court by the appellants against the annexation of certain territory to the appellee, City of Batesville, Indiana.

Ordinance No. 382, which is the basis of this action, was adopted on November 11, 1957. While this appeal was pending, said ordinance was repealed by the Common Council of the City of Batesville by Ordinance No. 416, adopted March 27, 1961.

*641On March 30, 1961, appellees filed their supplemental motion to dismiss this appeal, attaching to said motion a certified copy of the repealing ordinance, stating that under authority of *Vesenmeir et al.*v. *City of Aurora, etc.*(1953), 232 Ind. 628, 115 N. E. 2d 734, this action has become moot and should therefore be dismissed at the costs of the appellants.

Subsequently, on April 11, 1961, appellants filed herein their motion to dismiss this appeal by reason of the fact that by the action of the appellees in repealing the ordinance the question sought to be presented by this appeal, has become moot. With said motion, appellants urged that the appeal be dismissed at appellees’ costs.

Following the authority of the *Vesenmeir*case, *supra,*cited by appellees, the motion to dismiss this appeal is proper because the real controversy involved in this appeal has been removed by the repeal of the ordinance, and the question here for that reason becomes moot. However, since the acts of the appellees pending this appeal were responsible for this, it is only just and proper that the costs of this appeal should be paid by appellees. See *Thalman et al.*v. *Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.*(1950), 120 Ind. App. 532, 94 N. E. 2d 370, which followed the authority laid down in the case of *Ogborn*v. *City of Newcastle*(1912), 178 Ind. 161, 98 N. E. 869. See also §2-3237, Burns’ 1946 Replacement, which provides against which party costs shall go and also provides that “in all other cases, costs shall be awarded as the court may deem right, following as nearly as possible, the general regulation for awarding costs.”

The motion of the appellants to dismiss this appeal and to tax costs against the appellees is now sustained.

The appeal is dismissed at the costs of the appellees.

Note. — Reported in 174 N. E. 2d 344.
Exhibit 31.2



Certifications



I, Edward Escudero, certify that:



1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Petro Financial Corporation;



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



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



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



(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;



(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this
report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



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



(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  August 13, 2003                                 
|-------------------------------------------------------
|                                                       
|/s/  Edward Escudero                                   
|                                                       
|(Edward Escudero) Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer
NO. 07-05-0153-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

OCTOBER 18, 2005

______________________________

MARTIN ZORILLA, 

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 179TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY;

NO. 977,934; HON. J. MICHAEL WILKINSON, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant, Martin Zorilla, appeals his conviction for possessing a controlled

substance (cocaine) with intent to deliver. Pursuant to a plea of guilty but without an

agreed recommendation from the State as to punishment, the trial court found the

evidence substantiated a finding of guilt and sentenced appellant to 40 years in prison and

a $150,000 fine. 
1

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

2

Appellant’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders1 brief,

wherein she certified that, after diligently searching the record, she concluded that the

appeal is without merit. Along with her brief, appellate counsel attached a copy of a letter

sent to appellant informing him of counsel’s belief that there was no reversible error and

of appellant’s right to file a response or brief pro se. By letter dated August 29, 2005, this

court notified appellant, upon his request for additional time to file a pro se brief, that the

deadline for doing so was October 17, 2005. To date, appellant has neither filed a

response, brief, or another request for an extension. 

In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel discussed

several potential areas for appeal. They involved 1) the adequacy of the indictment, 2) the

court’s ruling on appellant’s motion to suppress, 3) the plea including the admonishments,

the sufficiency of the evidence, and the pre-sentence investigation, 4) the voluntariness of

the plea, 5) ineffective assistance of counsel, and 6) the propriety of the sentence.

Counsel then explained why each argument lacked merit. 

We conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of appellate

counsel’s representations and to uncover any error, reversible or otherwise, pursuant to

Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Like that of appellate counsel,

our review of the record uncovered no arguable error. 

Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

Brian Quinn 

Do not publish. Chief Justice
News United States Air Force
 Col. Richard Toliver: Pioneering combat pilotPublished Feb. 1, 2016
                        
                        By Air Force Public Affairs Agency
                
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --** Retired Col. Richard Toliver graduated from Tuskegee Institute University in January 1963 with a Bachelor of Science degree in mechanical engineering.
He began his Air Force career in February 1963 as a project engineer and completed pilot training in June 1965. He was one of the first five African American F-4 Phantom II pilots to serve under the famed Tuskegee Airman Gen. Daniel "Chappie" James.
Toliver was twice deployed during the Vietnam War and flew 446 missions and 860 combat hours in fighter jets.
During his 26 years of service, Toliver served throughout the United States, Southeast Asia, Europe, North Africa, and the Persian Gulf. He commanded a number of units and held key staff positions in major commands of the Air Force. He was a command pilot with 4,000 flying hours in the F-4, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, OT-37 Tweet, O-2 Skymaster, T-33 Shooting Star, and several civilian aircraft.
His many military decorations include the Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters, Air Medal with 27 oak leaf clusters, and the Air Force Commendation Medal.For Toliver’s complete Veterans in Blue profile, clickhere.
For information on African American History Month, click here.Tuskegee Institute University 



Vietnam War 



Tuskegee Airmen 



African American History Month 



Veterans in blue 



Col. Richard Toliver
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED SEPTEMBER 30, 2015

NO. 03-15-00283-CR

Richard Guy Jensen, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 264TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on March 31, 2015, denying appellant’s 

motion to reconsider community supervision. Having reviewed the record, it appears that the 

Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is 

made.
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
                         PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Globetel Communications Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three month period ended June 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Timothy Huff, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

1.   the Report fully complies with the requirement 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Timothy M. Huff
Timothy M. Huff
Chief Executive Officer
August 16, 2004
583 A.2d 311

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. KENNETH C. ALLEBACH.

January 23, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
#### L. H. Carhart v. D. R. Britt et al.

(No. 2825.)

October 31, 1888.

Error from Wilbarger County.

*(Transferred from, Austin.)*

Sparkman & Wells, counsel for plaintiff in error. .

Frank McG-hee, counsel for defendants in error.

Opinion by

Will-son, J.

§ 373. *Return of service of citation held insufficient to support judgment by default.*This writ of error is prosecuted from a judgment by default. The return of service upon the citation shows that said citation was served upon “L. H. Oawhart.” *Held:*“Carhart” and “Cawhart”are not *idem soncms,*and therefore it does not appear that L. H. Carhart, against whom the judgment was rendered, had prior to such judgment been served with citation in the cause. [1 App. C. C. § 552; Faver v. Robinson, 46 Tex. 204.]

Reversed and remanded.