alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 14

- 00144

- CR

IN RE: REGINALD REECE

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION
On May 6, 2014, this Court found reversible error in the sentencing proceeding of the trial of Reginald Reece and remanded the case to the trial court for a new punishment hearing.
See Reece v. State , 06

- 13

- 00082

- CR, 2014 WL 1851322 (Tex. App.

— Texarkana May 6, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) . Reece has now filed a petition fo r writ of
mandamus asking this C ourt to require the trial court to bench warrant Reece to Bowie County for a new punishment hearing. 1
The standard for mandamus relief articulated by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals requires the relator to establish that (1) there is no adequate remedy at law to redress the alleged harm, and (2) only a ministerial act, not a discretionary or judicial decision, is being sought. State ex. rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana , 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). Due to the nature of this remedy, it is Reece’ s burden to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief

. Barnes v. State , 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) ( “ Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he
seeks. ” )

.

1 Reece was convicted of theft of property valued at $500.00 or more but less than $1 , 500.00. See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 31.03(e)(4)(D) (West Supp. 2014 ) . He had twice been convicted of theft , making this a state jail felony offense. The State also proved two prior felony convictions , which increased the punishment to second

- degr ee felony level. See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 12.4 2 5(b) (West Supp. 2014 ). The judgment indicates that Reece was convicted of a second degree felony. Reece requests that we issue a new judgment showing that he was convicted only of a state jail felony off ense. Since this case is remanded for another punishment hearing, a new judgment and sentence will be issued by the trial court after Reece’s new punishment hearing. Therefore, it is unnecessary for us to modify the present judgment.3 After we received Reece’s peti tion, the trial court notified this Court that a bench warrant had been issued for Reece and that Reece is currently in the Bowie County Jail awaiting a punishment trial. Because Reece has attained all the relief sought before this Court, we deny his peti tion for a writ of mandamus.

Jack Carter Justice
Date Submitted: August 28 , 2014 Date Decided: August 29 , 2014
Do Not Publish
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION UNDER 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITHSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the following certification is being made to accompany the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004:

In connection with the Annual Report of Phoenix Interests, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James D. Tilton, Jr., Acting Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)  
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)  
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/   James D. Tilton,
Jr.                                             
Name:  James D. Tilton, Jr.Title:  Chief Executive Officer and actingChief Financial Officer



March 31, 2005
|    |                                                                                                                  |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc; |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 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. |

|                               |
|-------------------------------|
|                               |
| /s/ Daniel W. Dienst          |
| Chief Executive Officer       |
| (principal executive officer) |
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

LAKEISA GRIFFIN, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CA 15-0189-WS-C

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, :

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

:

Defendant.

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the order entered on this date, it is hereby ORDERED, 

ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security 

denying plaintiff benefits be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 

U.S.C. § 405(g), see Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 111 S.Ct. 2157, 115 L.Ed.2d 78 

(1991), for further proceedings not inconsistent with this decision. The remand pursuant 

to sentence four of § 405(g) makes the plaintiff a prevailing party for purposes of the 

Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 112 S.Ct. 

2625, 125 L.Ed.2d 239 (1993), and terminates this Court’s jurisdiction over this matter. 

DONE this 14th day of January, 2016.

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00189-WS-C Document 20 Filed 01/14/16 Page 1 of 1
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2497 

To permit an issuer, when determining the market capitalization of the 

issuer for purposes of testing the significance of an acquisition or disposition, to include the value of all shares of the issuer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 6, 2023 

Mr. HILL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To permit an issuer, when determining the market capitalization of the issuer for purposes of testing the significance 

of an acquisition or disposition, to include the value 

of all shares of the issuer. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AVOIDING ABERRATIONAL RESULTS IN RE4 QUIREMENTS FOR ACQUISITION AND DIS5 POSITION FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 

6 The Securities and Exchange Commission shall revise 

7 section 210.1–02(w)(1)(i)(A) of title 17, Code of Federal 

8 Regulations, to permit a registrant, in determining the 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2497 IH

1 significance of an acquisition or disposition described in 

2 such section 210.1–02(w)(1)(i)(A), to calculate the reg3 istrant’s aggregate worldwide market value based on the 

4 applicable trading value, conversion value, or exchange 

5 value of all of the registrant’s outstanding classes of stock 

6 (including preferred stock and non-traded common shares 

7 that are convertible into or exchangeable for traded com8 mon shares) and not just the voting and non-voting com9 mon equity of the registrant. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Consolidated
Capital Properties III 1999 First Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000317331
<NAME> CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,069
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          14,660
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,206
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,179
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                          4,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,565
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,179
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   971
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   820
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  85
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       151
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .91<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,585,654
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,507,624
<ALLOWANCES>                                    75,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,211,336
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,829,809
<PP&E>                                      87,465,043
<DEPRECIATION>                              21,289,526
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              78,612,776
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,554,551
<BONDS>                                      9,526,136
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,639,662
<OTHER-SE>                                  55,444,239
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                78,612,776
<SALES>                                     22,570,837
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,570,837
<CGS>                                       20,506,099
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               20,506,099
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               450,128
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             342,588
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,302,959
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (67,922)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,370,881
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,370,881
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
#### Jean M. Emery, Appellant-Respondent, v Roger N. Parker et al., Respondents-Appellants.

[968 NYS2d 480]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Wooten, J.), entered April 16, 2012, dismissing the complaint pursuant to an order, same court and Justice, entered March 23, 2012, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment, awarded costs to defendants, and denied defendants’ request for sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action against defendants, attorneys who represented Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in litigation before the Department of Labor disputing plaintiff s application *636for unemployment insurance after she resigned from MSKCC, the motion court properly granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the claim made pursuant Judiciary Law § 487 (1). Defendants did not engage in conduct amounting to a “ ‘chronic and extreme pattern of legal delinquency’ ” to support such a claim *(see Kinberg v Opinsky,*51 AD3d 548, 549 [1st Dept 2008], quoting *Nason v Fisher,*36 AD3d 486, 487 [1st Dept 2007]). Notably, defendants made no misstatements to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board or the Appellate Division, Third Department, and plaintiff consistently prevailed in those proceedings. Additionally, defendants cited a credible basis for their claims of bias by the ALJ, which plaintiff does not refute. Even assuming that the bias claims are meritless, that alone does not amount to conduct supporting a Judiciary Law § 487 (1) claim.

Plaintiff does not cite any facts suggesting that she should have been afforded discovery pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f). On the contrary, the record is complete on all material issues. Plaintiffs request for discovery relating to a handwritten annotation on a form that was relevant to her claim for unemployment insurance before the Department of Labor is not relevant to her section 487 claim, the only claim at issue here.

The motion court properly denied defendants’ request for sanctions. Although plaintiff’s claims are meritless, plaintiffs pursuit of the instant lawsuit is not frivolous within the meaning of 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (c). Defendants’ renewed request for sanctions based on plaintiffs submission of an incomplete appendix is also denied. Defendants’ request for costs associated with their Respondents’ Appendix is denied. Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.

Motion to file supplemental appendix granted to the extent of deeming pages of transcripts from the underlying hearing and emails between plaintiff and Parker, attached as an exhibit to the motion, filed as plaintiff’s supplemental appendix, and

otherwise denied.
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 33-44337, 333-17613, 333-68767, 333-93735, 333-44002, and
333-68208) of CTC Communications Group, Inc. of our report dated February
15, 2002, except for Note 6 and the last paragraph of Note 7, as to which
the date is March 6, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of CTC Communications Group, Inc. included in the
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001.




						/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 27, 2002
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT R OY WARDEN,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt, v. B OB W ALKUP, individually and in his offic ia l c a pa c ity a s Tuc son C ity

M ay or; e t a l., De fe nda

n ts-Appe lle e s. No. 14-16440 D.C . No. 4:13-c v-01067-DC B M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ariz o na David C . B ury , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Se pte m

be r 27, 2016 * * B e fore : TASHIM A , SILVER M AN, a nd M . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. R oy W arde n a

ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t

c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismissing his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging va rious c la im s a

rising from

his re m ova l from

a public pa rk and a rre st a t a c i ty c ounc il m e e ting. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28



# FIL ED OCT 05 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).U.S.C . § 1291. W e re v ie w de n ovo a dism issa l on the ba sis of c la i m pre c lusion. Ste w art v . U.S. Banc orp , 297 F.3d 953, 956 (9th C ir. 2002). W e va c ate and re m and. In light of our disposition in W arde n v . Robinson e t

al. , No. 14-15803, we va c a te the judgm e nt in this ac tion a nd re m and to thedistric t c ourt be c a use the re is c urre ntly no fina l judgm e nt on them e rits pre c luding this ac tion. Se e Ste w art , 297 F.3d at 956 (sta

ting there quire m e n ts for a pplic ation of c la im

pre c lusion, inc luding a fina l judgm e nt on them e rits). W e e xpre ss no opinion on the m e rits of W arde n’ s c la im s. W arde n ’ s m otion to c orre c t the c a ption, file d on July

28, 2014, is denie d. The pa rtie s sha ll be ar the ir own c osts on a ppe a l. V ACAT E D and RE M ANDE D .

1 4 - 1 6 4 4 0 2
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 78725]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30596]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 224

RIN 0648-XZ50


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Endangered 
Listing of Five Species of Sawfish Under the Endangered Species Act

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects the amendatory instruction to a final 
rule published on December 12, 2014, which incorrectly instructed 
deletion of the U.S. Distinct Population Segment of smalltooth sawfish 
(Pristis pectinata) from the list of endangered species under the 
Endangered Species Act. This correction removes the incorrect language 
from the instruction.

DATES: This final rule correction is effective January 12, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Information regarding this final rule may be obtained by 
contacting NMFS, Endangered Species Division, 1315 East West Highway, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Dwayne Meadows, NMFS, Office of 
Protected Resources (301) 427-8403.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Need for Correction

    In a final rule NMFS published on December 12, 2014 (79 FR 73977) 
to list 5 species of sawfishes as endangered, we incorrectly included 
an instruction in the regulatory text section to delete the entry for a 
prior listing for a different sawfish (the U.S. Distinct Population 
Segment of smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata)) from the list of 
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act in 50 CFR 
224.101(h). On page 74005, in column 3, amendatory instruction 2.A. is 
corrected to reads as follows:
    ``2. In Sec.  224.101, paragraph (h), amend the table by:
    A. Removing the ``Sawfish, largetooth'' entry.''

    Dated: December 19, 2014.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-30596 Filed 12-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
#### Town of Throop, Appellant, v Christine Cordway, Respondent.

[971 NYS2d 917]

— Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Thomas G. Beone, A.J.), entered March 22, 2012. The order reversed and vacated a decision and order of the Town of Throop Town Court, dated August 16, 2011.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for the reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. Present — Centra, J.E, Peradotto, Garni and Bindley, JJ.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE  
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                    0000318716     
<NAME>                   NUMEX CORPORATION  
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U. S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                   APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                            0
<CASH>                                                 8,004
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            151
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                           60,108
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     218,589
<PP&E>                                               215,501
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (212,669)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       615,006
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              1,850,537
<BONDS>                                            1,292,834
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                          170,000
<COMMON>                                             629,275
<OTHER-SE>                                        (3,327,640)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         615,006
<SALES>                                              164,391
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     164,391
<CGS>                                                 67,619
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        308,945
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    93,328
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (203,541)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (204,478)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           137
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (204,341)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (.03)
        


</TABLE>