alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1100 

To revise the boundary of the Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site 

in the State of North Carolina, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2007 

Mr. SHULER (for himself, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. 

PRICE of North Carolina, Mr. TANNER, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. ETHERIDGE, 

Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. BUTTERFIELD, Mr. EMANUEL, Mr. 

HARE, Mr. MILLER of North Carolina, Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Mr. 

KIRK, Ms. BEAN, and Mr. ELLSWORTH) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To revise the boundary of the Carl Sandburg Home National 

Historic Site in the State of North Carolina, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Carl Sandburg Home 

5 National Historic Site Boundary Revision Act of 2007’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 1100 IH

1 SEC. 2. CARL SANDBURG HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE 

2 BOUNDARY REVISION. 

3 Public Law 90–592 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 82 Stat. 

4 1154) is amended— 

5 (1) by redesignating section 3 as section 4; and 

6 (2) by inserting after section 2 the following: 

7 ‘‘SEC. 3. ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL LAND. 

8 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior 

9 (referred to in this section as the ‘Secretary’) may acquire 

10 from willing sellers by donation or purchase with donated 

11 or appropriated funds not more than 115 acres of land 

12 (including any improvements to the land) or interests (in13 cluding conservation easements) in land contiguous to the 

14 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site (referred to 

15 in this section as the ‘Historic Site’) for inclusion in the 

16 Historic Site. 

17 ‘‘(b) VISITOR CENTER.—Not more than 5 acres of 

18 land acquired under subsection (a) may be used for— 

19 ‘‘(1) a visitor and education center; and 

20 ‘‘(2) a visitor parking area. 

21 ‘‘(c) BOUNDARY REVISION.—On acquisition of any 

22 land or interest in land under subsection (a), the Secretary 

23 shall revise the boundary of the Historic Site to reflect 

24 the acquisition. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•HR 1100 IH

1 ‘‘(d) ADMINISTRATION.—Any land acquired by the 

2 Secretary under subsection (a) shall be administered by 

3 the Secretary as part of the Historic Site. 

4 ‘‘(e) APPLICABLE LAW.—Sections 302, 303, and 304 

5 of the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 (Public 

6 Law 95–625; 92 Stat. 3467) shall apply to the acquisition 

7 of land under subsection (a) and the boundary revision 

8 under subsection (c), except that the reference in section 

9 302 of that Act to the date of enactment shall be consid10 ered to be a reference to the date of enactment of the 

11 Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site Boundary 

12 Revision Act of 2007.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

SANDEE BRYAN MARION FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT KEITH E. HOTTLE CLERK

CHIEF JUSTICE CADENA-REEVES JUSTICE CENTER OF COURT

KAREN ANGELINI 300 DOLOROSA, SUITE 3200

MAR1ALYN BARNARD SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7820S-3037 TELEPHONE

REBECA C. MARTINEZ WWW.TXCOURTS.GOV/4THCOA.ASPX (210)335-2635

PATRICIA O. ALVAREZ

LUZ ELENA D. CHAPA FACSIMILE NO.

JASON PULLIAM (210)335-2762

JUSTICES

April 27, 2015

David L. Reuthinger, Jr. Nathan H. Chu

Webb County District Attorney's Office 5517 McPherson, Suite 14

1110 Victoria, Suite 401 Laredo, TX 78041

Laredo, TX 78040

Oscar A. Vela, Jr.

Law Offices of Oscar A. Vela, Jr.

5517 McPherson Road, Ste. 14

Laredo, Texas 78041

RE: Court of Appeals Numbers: 04-14-00716-CR 04-14-00717-CR

Trial Court Case Number: 2014-CRM-0003 89-D2

Styles: Francisco Javie Azuara, Jr. and Alfonso Carlos

Tamez v. The State of Texas

Dear Counsel:

Enclosed please find the order which the Honorable Court of Appeals has issued

in reference to the above styled and numbered cause.

If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very truly yours,

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Margaret/E. Adams

Legal Assistant, Fourth Court of Appeals

210.335.3854
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Danira HAWKINS.

No. 2011-K-2782.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 13, 2012.

In re Hawkins, Danira; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. K, No. 486-525; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-KA-0193.

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          80,577
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,844
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,131,899
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,678,718
<PP&E>                                       4,854,721
<DEPRECIATION>                               (375,362)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,715,652
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,087,443
<BONDS>                                        600,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,500,000
<COMMON>                                     3,618,194
<OTHER-SE>                                   (749,669)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,715,652
<SALES>                                        970,558
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,024,389
<CGS>                                          578,576
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  578,576
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             273,264
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,659,116)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,659,116)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.13)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 99

                                  CERTIFICATION



         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of CVF
Technologies Corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's
knowledge, that:

         The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002
(the "Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




Dated:   April 15, 2003                          /s/ Jeffrey I. Dreben
                                                 ---------------------
                                                   Jeffrey I. Dreben,
                                                   Chief Executive Officer




Dated:   April 15, 2003                          /s/ Robert L. Miller
                                                 --------------------
                                                   Robert L. Miller,
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000920354
<NAME> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          16,336
<SECURITIES>                                    37,120
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,919
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,328
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                80,477
<PP&E>                                          16,124
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,719
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  88,863
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,563
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            98
<OTHER-SE>                                      65,896
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    88,863
<SALES>                                         24,888
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                45,565
<CGS>                                            1,251
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,433
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,904
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   549
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,033
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,968
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,228
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,065
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .50
        

</TABLE>
News United States Air Force
 Changes coming to TRICARE pharmacy benefitPublished Sept. 16, 2015
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE (AFNS) --**
                Starting Oct. 1, a new law requires all TRICARE beneficiaries, except active duty service members, to get select brand name maintenance drugs through either TRICARE Pharmacy Home Delivery or from a military pharmacy. Beneficiaries who keep using a retail pharmacy for these drugs will have to pay the full cost.Maintenance drugs are those you take regularly for a long time, such as drugs to control blood pressure or cholesterol. The law does not apply to drugs you take for a short time, like antibiotics, or generic drugs. Beneficiaries living overseas, or with other prescription drug coverage, are not affected.The TRICARE pharmacy contractor, Express Scripts, is sending a letter to beneficiaries taking an affected drug, explaining their options. Beneficiaries can contact Express Scripts at 1-877-363-1303 to see if they are affected.After Oct. 1, beneficiaries still filling an affected drug at a retail pharmacy will receive another letter informing them of the change to the benefit. After that, beneficiaries have one final “courtesy” fill at a retail pharmacy. If they fill at a retail pharmacy again, they have to pay 100 percent of the cost of their medication.TRICARE Pharmacy Home Delivery is a safe, convenient and low cost option to get maintenance drugs. You can get up to a 90-day supply, as opposed to a 30-day supply from a retail pharmacy. You save up to $176 a year for every brand name drug you switch to home delivery. Military pharmacies offer up to a 90-day supply of drugs at zero copay, but not all drugs are available. You can check with your local military pharmacy to see if they carry your prescription.For more information about this change to TRICARE’s pharmacy benefit, click here.*(Information courtesy of TRICARE.mil)*pharmacy changes 



TRICARE Pharmacy Home Delivery 



TRICARE
| Name                                                    | Jurisdiction of  Organization |
|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
|                                                    |                          |
| Learning      Curve International, Inc.                 | Delaware                      |
| RC2      Limited                                        | Hong      Kong                |
| Learning      Curve Brands, Inc.                        | Delaware                      |
| Learningcurveshop.com,      Inc.                        | Delaware                      |
| Racing      Champions Worldwide Limited                 | United      Kingdom           |
| Racing      Champions International Limited             | United      Kingdom           |
| Bondco      988 Limited                                 | United      Kingdom           |
| Acre      689 Limited                                   | United      Kingdom           |
| RC2      Deutschland GmbH                               | Germany                       |
| Learning      Curve Canada Holdco, Inc.                 | Delaware                      |
| RC2      Canada Corporation                             | Nova      Scotia, Canada      |
| RC2      Australia Pty. Ltd.                            | Australia                     |
| RCE      Holdings, LLC                                  | Delaware                      |
| RC2      (Asia) Limited                                 | Hong      Kong                |
| Learning      Curve Canada Limited                      | Ontario,      Canada          |
| Learning      Curve Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.          | Mexico                        |
| Learning      Curve Services Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. | Mexico                        |

----
Order entered November 13, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00108-CV

UNITED SERVICES PROFESSIONAL GROUP, INC.

D/B/A PYRAMID REALTY, ET AL., Appellants

V.

DAVID M. HURT, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-10-04892-I

ORDER

We GRANT appellees’ November 11, 2014 unopposed second motion for an extension 

of time to file a brief. Appellees shall file a brief by December 19, 2014. We caution appellees 

that no further extension of time will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
#### STATE ex rel. Anthony MARTIN v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2011-KH-1218.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 2011.

In re Martin, Anthony; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. D, No. 476-091; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-K-0667.

Denied.
#### G. E. Attaway v. R. T. Mattox.

(No. 3184.)

Appeal from Wood County.

Hart & Craddock, counsel for appellant.

No counsel appeared for appellee.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

*40§ 21. *Verbal contract; whether to be performed within one year or not, a question of fact for the jury.*This suit was instituted by appellee against appellant to recover damages for breach of a verbal contract, whereby appellant employed appellee as a clerk and salesman, at the price of $30 per month for one year. Appellant discharged appellee from said employment, and appellee claimed that he had thereby been damaged $215. He recovered judgment for $100 and costs. It is claimed by appellant that the contract of'employment is void under the statute of frauds, it being a contract which was not to be performed within one year from the making thereof, and being verbal. [R. S., art. 2464.] If the fact be that the contract was not to be performed within the space of one year from the making thereof, appellant’s position is correct. This was a question of fact for the jury to determine from the evidence, and it was, we think, fairly and correctly submitted to the jury by the charge of the court, and in finding for appellee the jury must have found that the contract was to be performed within one year from the making thereof.

§ 22. *Argument of counsel; improper and unwarranted statements, when ground for reversal.*It is made to appear by a bill of exceptions that counsel for appellee, in closing his argument to the jury, said: “The plaintiff recovered a judgment in this case on a former trial hereof on the same proof as was proven on this trial.” Manifestly this statement of counsel was improper. It was not legitimate argument and not warranted by the evidence, for it was not, and co'uld not legally have been, proved on the trial that there had been a former trial and verdict in the case upon the same evidence. It is well settled that improper, unwarranted statements made by counsel in concluding the argument in a cause, when of a nature calculated to injure and prejudice the opposite party, constitute good ground for a new trial or for a reversal of the judgment in case a new trial is refused. *41[Willis v. McNeill, 57 Tex. 465; Railway Co. v. Jarrell, 60 Tex. 268; Franklin v. Tiernan, 62 Tex. 92.] We think the statement complained of was well calculated to work injury and prejudice to the appellant, and entitles him to a new trial.

November 6, 1889.

Reversed and remanded.
#### Dennis T. HUTTO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D10-3784.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 14, 2010.

Dennis T. Hutto, pro se, Appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Thomas H. Duffy, Assistant Attirbet General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant has filed a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion stating that in November 2009 he was arrested for driving while license suspended or revoked, and thereafter entered into a negotiated plea agreement with the state which called for a sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment. He scored 14.1 points on his guidelines scoresheet. The court sentenced him to 18 months’ imprisonment. The appellant states that the court did not make any findings that he could be a danger to the public if the court did not sentence him to prison, and the record does not contain any such written findings.

In the instant motion the appellant argues that his sentence is illegal because, for the reason set forth below, he should have been sentenced to a nonstate prison sentence based upon his score of 14.1 points. The trial court denied the motion without any analysis or record attachments.

The appellant bases his illegal sentence claim on the fact that section 775.082(10), Florida Statutes (2009), which took effect just prior to the appellant’s arrest, states that anyone who commits a crime:

> on or after July 1, 2009, which is a third degree felony but not a forcible felony as defined in s. 776.08, and excluding any third degree felony violation under chapter 810, and if the total sentence points pursuant to s. 921.0024 are 22 points or fewer, the court must sentence the offender to a nonstate prison sanction. However, if the court makes written findings that a nonstate prison sanction could present a danger to the public, the court may sentence the offender to a *86state correctional facility pursuant to this section.

As noted, the appellant scored 14.1 points on his scoresheet, and the record before this Court does not contain any written findings from the lower court that the appellant could present a danger to the public if not sentenced to prison. It thus appears from the record that the appellant should have been sentenced to a nonstate prison sentence.

We therefore reverse and remand the order on appeal for the lower court to either attach record documents conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim or for further proceedings. *See e.g., West v. State,*818 So.2d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

VAN NORTWICK, LEWIS, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET (UNAUDITED) AS OFJUNE 30, 1999 AND THE STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(UNAUDITED) FOR THE SIX MONTHS AND THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,498                     118
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,986                   2,986
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,484                   3,104
<PP&E>                                          16,849                  14,218
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,055                   7,260
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 270,920                 280,982
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          492,464                 482,413
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                       254,637                 254,637
<OTHER-SE>                                   (460,903)               (456,068)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 (286,198)               (280,982)
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (664,145)               (239,614)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (664,145)               (239,614)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (664,145)               (239,614)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>