alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 11



                          STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION
                        OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (LOSS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                           March 31, 
                                                   ------------------------
                                                      1998          1997
                                                   ----------    ----------
<S>                                               <C>           <C>
Numerator:
   Net income for basic and 
      diluted earnings per share                  $  303,000    $ (488,000)
                                                   ----------    ----------

Denominator:
   Denominator for basic earnings per
      common share - weighted-average shares       3,954,196     3,921,853  

   Effect of dilutive securities:
      Employee stock options                            -            8,692  
                                                   ----------    ----------
   Denominator for diluted earnings per
      common share - weighted-average shares       3,954,196     3,930,545  
                                                   ==========    ==========

Basic earnings (loss) per common share            $     0.08    $    (0.12)
                                                   ==========    ==========
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share          $     0.08    $    (0.12)
                                                   ==========    ==========
</TABLE>





















                                   E - 2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 8958]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.*; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera from the Jacques and Natasha Gelman Collection and 20th Century Mexican Art from the Stanley and Pearl Goodman Collection,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Nova Southeastern University Museum of Art, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, from on or about February 26, 2015, until on or about May 31, 2015, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the imported objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

Dated: November 20, 2014.

Kelly Keiderling,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2014-28048 Filed 11-26-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 19

- 00702

- CR

Jesse Gregory NARVAIZ

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR0351

Honorable Frank J. Castro , Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE WATKINS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED October 21, 2020.

_____________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.7.1.1

Western Division

Nick Georgeff

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 3:20−cv−50313

Honorable Iain D. Johnston

Don Borneke Construction, Inc

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, June 5, 2023:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lisa A. Jensen: The Court has received the

parties' joint status report [78]. The Court grants the parties' joint request to extend the

date to depose the rebuttal expert to 7/13/2023. A telephonic status hearing to discuss next

steps in the case is set for 7/24/2023 at 10:15 AM. Public access is available via the

following call−in number: (877) 336−1831 with access code 2813746 #. Counsel for all

parties are ordered to appear by using the following link:

https://teleconference.uc.att.com/ecm/?bp=40444363 97&mac=2813746; or by using the

call−in number above. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the

general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court

proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions. Mailed notice. (vk)

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 3:20-cv-50313 Document #: 79 Filed: 06/05/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:201
#### John W. Underhill *v.*William Raswell.

Arbitration and Award — Award—Delivery of Copies.

Under Civ. Code, § 499, subisec. 6, requiring delivery of copies of ' award to eacli of ¡the parties, delivery of a copy of the award to the ¡attorney of one of the parties is reversible error.

APPEAL FROM WARREN' CIRCUIT COURT.

January 24, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Peters:

. Although this vexatious litigation has already been protracted for years, and until the costs very far exceeds the insignificant amount of the judgment from which this appeal is prosecuted, still this court is powerless to put an end to it, and unless we would disregard a plain and positive requirement of the statute we feel constrained to reverse the judgment of the court 'below, reluctantly, indeed, on account of the smallness of the amount involved, and of the further opportunity it will afford the parties to use the court, or a conven*393tional tribunal as an elysium to luxuriate in the spirit of controversy, it may be, for another seven years.

*Rodes, for appellant.*

*J. E. Hasxntell, Dulaney, for appellee.*

By Subdiv. 6 of Sec. 499, Civil Code, arbitrators and their umpire are required to make their award in writing, etc. And when it is so made out, one copy thereof shall be delivered to each of the contending parties, and the original returned to court, etc. In this case it appears that a copy of the award was delivered to the attorneys of each of the parties, and not to the parties themselves, and while from- the surroundings of this particular case, it can not be doubted that the delivery of the copy to the attorney of appellant had the effect in due time to apprise him of the result of the deliberations ■ of the arbitrators; still the statute is imperative, and we' can not disregard its behests.

■Wherefore the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to set aside the award and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28092]


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

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notice

November 24, 2014.

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, December 4, 2014.

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street 
entrance).

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the 
following in open session: Secretary of Labor v. Brody Mining, LLC, 
Docket Nos. WEVA 2009-1000, et al. (Issues include whether the 
Administrative Law Judge erred by vacating certain ``significant and 
substantial'' designations and ``unwarrantable failure to comply'' 
designations.)
    Any person attending this meeting who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/
(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

Sarah L. Stewart,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2014-28092 Filed 11-24-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4106 

To amend the Sherman Act to make oil-producing and exporting cartels 

illegal. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 1, 2004 

Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Ms. LOFGREN, and Mr. MCINTYRE) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Sherman Act to make oil-producing and 

exporting cartels illegal. 

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 ‘‘No Oil Producing and 

5 Exporting Cartels Act of 2004’’ or ‘‘NOPEC’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SHERMAN ACT. 

7 The Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) is amended 

8 by adding after section 7 the following: 
2 

•HR 4106 IH 

1 ‘‘SEC. 7A. OIL PRODUCING CARTELS. 

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall be illegal and a violation 

3 of this Act for any foreign state, or any instrumentality 

4 or agent of any foreign state, to act collectively or in com5 bination with any other foreign state, any instrumentality 

6 or agent of any other foreign state, or any other person, 

7 whether by cartel or any other association or form of co8 operation or joint action— 

9 ‘‘(1) to limit the production or distribution of 

10 oil, natural gas, or any other petroleum product; 

11 ‘‘(2) to set or maintain the price of oil, natural 

12 gas, or any petroleum product; or 

13 ‘‘(3) to otherwise take any action in restraint of 

14 trade for oil, natural gas, or any petroleum product; 

15 when such action, combination, or collective action has a 

16 direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on 

17 the market, supply, price, or distribution of oil, natural 

18 gas, or other petroleum product in the United States. 

19 ‘‘(b) SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.—A foreign state en20 gaged in conduct in violation of subsection (a) shall not 

21 be immune under the doctrine of sovereign immunity from 

22 the jurisdiction or judgments of the courts of the United 

23 States in any action brought to enforce this section. 

24 ‘‘(c) INAPPLICABILITY OF ACT OF STATE DOC25 TRINE.—No court of the United States shall decline, 
3 

•HR 4106 IH 

1 based on the act of state doctrine, to make a determina2 tion on the merits in an action brought under this section. 

3 ‘‘(d) ENFORCEMENT.—The Attorney General of the 

4 United States and the Federal Trade Commission may 

5 bring an action to enforce this section in any district court 

6 of the United States as provided under the antitrust 

7 laws.’’. 

8 SEC. 3. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. 

9 Section 1605(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 

10 amended— 

11 (1) in paragraph (6), by striking ‘‘or’’ after the 

12 semicolon; 

13 (2) in paragraph (7), by striking the period and 

14 inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

15 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

16 ‘‘(8) in which the action is brought under sec17 tion 7A of the Sherman Act.’’. 

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           3,897
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,745
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,158
<INVENTORY>                                        116
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,079
<PP&E>                                           9,411
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,052
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,318
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,251
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           143
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,921
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,318
<SALES>                                         11,446
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,446
<CGS>                                              721
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,602
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (763)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        36
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (799)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (1,719)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,518)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.23)
        

</TABLE>
#### Barton Lumber & Brick Company *v.*Caraway.

Opinion delivered January 28, 1929.

*Caraway, Baker & Gautney,*for appellant.

*Smith & Blackford,*for appellee.

McHaney, J.

This is a suit by appellant to enforce a mechanic’s lien for $618.30 on the building and improvements located on land described in the complaint against appellees, E. A. Caraway and wife, and Mrs. Bell Townsend. Caraway was the owner of the land. The Federal Land Bank, not a party to this suit, held a first mortgage, and Mrs. Townsend a second mortgage. A house insured for $600 was destroyed by fire, and that sum was paid to the Federal Land Bank and by it turned over to Caraway to erect a new house. He bought the material from appellant for the new house, and filed an answer to this suit, admitting that he purchased the material therefor from appellant, and that the balance due as claimed was correct.

There was a decree for appellant against Caraway and wife, but the court refused to declare and enforce a lien on the improvements.

No lien was sought upon the land, and correctly so, for both mortgages were filed prior to the furnishing of material. Only a lien on the new building or dwelling house was claimed, and it was superior to the second mortgage of appellee, Mrs. Bell Townsend, by virtue of *1035§ 6909, O. & M. Digest. Her mortgage lien covered the land and improvements at the time the mortgage was filed, but, when the dwelling house was destroyed by fire, her security was decreased by the value of the house. The erection of a new house thereafter would have been additional security had it been paid for. But the erection of a new house entitled the material furnisher to a mechanic’s lien superior to the mortgage, in so far as the house was concerned, but not as against the land. See *Judd*v. *Rieff,*174 Ark. 362, 295 S. W. 370, where it was held that a mechanic’s lien for material furnished to build a garage was superior to a vendor’s lien in so far as the garage is concerned. This court there said:

“In *Imboden*v. *Citizens’ Bank,*163 Ark. 615, 260 S. W. 734, we held that, under § 6909, *supra,*a mechanic’s or materialman’s lien is superior to a prior mortgage only on a separate building constructed with the labor and material furnished or such addition as is separable from the original building, without injury thereto. And in *Gunter*v. *Ludlam, supra,*we held that § 6911 of C. *&*M. Digest ‘gives priority to liens for labor or material only against other incumbrances created after the commencement of the improvement, and in effect subordinates the lien to.prior incumbrances by way of mortgage or otherwise.’ ”

It makes no difference, so far as Mrs. Townsend is concerned, that the house was burned and the insurance money used in part to erect a new house. She is in the same position she would have been had there never been a house on the property prior to the erection of the new one. The Federal Land Bank is not a party, and no priority is claimed as to it.

The court erred in not decreeing a lien on the building for the material bill. Reversed, and remanded with directions to enter a decree in accordance with this opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,807
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  200,668
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (7,519)
<INVENTORY>                                     20,172
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               258,865
<PP&E>                                         996,701
<DEPRECIATION>                               (381,778)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,582,691
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          183,787
<BONDS>                                      1,589,906
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       104,405
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,237,654
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,582,691
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               329,460
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  237,805
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                40,062
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,617
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,234
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 25,631
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,996
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,635
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,635
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
        

</TABLE>
```
Exhibit 32.1Certification of Chief Executive OfficerPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002                Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of MAXXAM Inc., a Delaware corporation (the ACompany@), does hereby certify that:(a)           the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2007 of the Company (the AReport@) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b)           the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated:   April 30, 2008                                                 	    		    		    		    		                   /S/   CHARLES E. HURWITZ             		    		    		    		    	      Charles E. Hurwitz    		    		    		    		    	      Chief Executive OfficerThe foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code).
```