alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 14 , 2012

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 12

- 00473

- CV

JUDITH WRIGHT PATTER SON , Appellant

V.

ETHEL LOUISE WILLIAM S , RICK HARRIS , WILLIAM F. WILSON, NORMA WILSON, DIANE STIEBENS, KATHERINE HARPER, ANDREA ATKINS, ROBERTA LYTLE, THOMAS WILSON, WILLIAM WILSON, JR., CAROL JO VAN HORN WELLWOOD, DONNA VAN HORN COBB, WILLIAM E. WILLIAMS, REBECCA WILSON AND DAVID TOWNSEND , Appe llee s

On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2009

- 16669



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment signed February 10, 2012. The notice of appeal
was filed May 10, 2012. To date, our records show that appellant has not paid the $175.00 appellate filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil2

ca ses unless indigent); Tex. R. App. P. 20.1 (listing requirements for establishing
indigence); see also ; Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. ' 51.207

. On July 3, 2012, this court ordered appellant to pay the appellate filing fee on or
before July 18, 2012, or the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has not paid the
appellate filing fee. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P.

42.3 (c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case because appellant has failed to comply
with notice from clerk requiring response or other action within specified time).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Seymore, Boyce, and McCally

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE COMPANY'S 2nd QUARTER 10-Q
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          14,235
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,435
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,063
<INVENTORY>                                     26,589
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,022
<PP&E>                                          27,033
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,445
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 116,280
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,462
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           132
<OTHER-SE>                                      85,805
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   116,280
<SALES>                                         62,690
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,194
<CGS>                                           36,417
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   42,534
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,401
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (240)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,711
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,667
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,044
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,044
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.39
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 21, 2014 

# Order

April 2 1 , 2014

149105 & (3)(4) ( 5 )

TIMOTHY A

. STOEPKER

, Plaintiff,

v

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

, Defendant. SC: 149105

ADB: 13

- 000032

- GA

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the stipulation to dismiss the complaint for

superintending control is GRANTED. The dismissal is with prejudice and without costs

or fees to either party. The earlier

- filed motion s to expedite and for immediate

consideration are denied as moot.
#### THE MAME.

(District Court, D. Connecticut.

April 13, 1911.)

No. 1,628.

Towage (§ 9*) — Compensation—Actions—Pleading.

A libel for towage services to a vessel in her home port where the bargain was made with the owner, which states that the services were performed at the special instance and request of the owner, and- which does not set forth that they were done on the credit of the vessel, and which does not show that a state statute created a.lien, does not set forth facts to support an action in rem.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Towage, Dec. Dig. § 9.*] .

In Admiralty. Libel by the New Haven Towing Company against the scow Mame, her tackle, etc. Exceptions sustained, and libel dismissed.

Robert C. Stoddard, for libelant.

James D. Dewell, Jr., for claimant.

PLATT, District Judge.

This matter was beard on exceptions. The pith of the criticism is that the action is in rem, but that the libel does not set forth facts sufficient to support such an action.

To particularize, it states that the towage services were performed at the special instance and request of the owner, and does not set forth' that they were done on the credit of the vessel. The scow was in the home port.. The bargain was made with her owner, and there is no state statute creating a lien which this court might be asked to enforce, if such a statute were in existence. The proctor for the libelant admits that he used an ancient form of' libel' which was framed to fit actions in personam, but he wishes the court to treat it as if he had used one suited to actions in rem, which was at his hand in Benedict within a page or two of the one selected.

Without doubt the court has jurisdiction of the cause, but manifestly the libelant mistook his remedy.

Exceptions sustained and libel dismissed, with costs to claimant,
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      47,168,476
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               28,989,462
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,200,946
<INVENTORY>                                 35,035,228
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           121,333,877
<PP&E>                                       9,013,290
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,000,119
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             183,742,045
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       22,368,494
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    976,755
<COMMON>                                       140,836
<OTHER-SE>                                 160,255,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               161,373,551
<SALES>                                     40,572,193
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            40,572,193
<CGS>                                       27,511,144
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               27,511,144
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,122,426
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,161,910
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,127,477
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,034,433
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,034,433
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES
               SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                     Washington, DC  20549


                           FORM 10-Q

        (X)  QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15 (d)
             OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

        For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 1996

                               OR

     ( ) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d)
             OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

  For the Transition Period from ____________ to _____________

                 Commission file number 0-12293

                 CANISCO RESOURCES, INC.
     (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

     Delaware                                54-0952207
(State  of  Incorporation)          (IRS Employer Identification No.)

     300 Delaware Ave. Suite 714, Wilmington, DE            19801
      (Address of Principal Executive Offices)           (Zip Code)

                         (302) 777-5050 
      (Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)


      Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all  reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d)  of  the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding  12  months
(or  for such shorter period that the registrant was required  to
file  such  reports),  and (2) has been subject  to  such  filing
requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes   (X)  No   ( )


   Common Stock, par value $.0025 per share 2,169,190 shares
              outstanding as of June 30, 1996.



PART II   ITEM 6         EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

Exhibit 27     Financial Data Schedule for the Three Month Period
               Ended June 30, 1996.



                         SIGNATURES

Date:  August 12, 1996                CANISCO RESOURCES, INC.

                                      /s/  Ralph A. Trallo
                                      President and CEO

                                      /s/  Michael J. Olson
                                      Chief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

The following certification is provided by the undersigned Chief Financial
Officer of Tellabs, Inc. (the Company) on the basis of such officers
knowledge and belief for the sole purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

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 Tellabs, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 27, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Timothy J.
Wiggins, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and
for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 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 results of
operations of the Company.

/s/ Timothy J. Wiggins
Timothy J. Wiggins
Chief Financial Officer
Date: August 4, 2003

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.

The certification in this Report is being furnished in accordance with SEC
Release No. 33-8212. The certification is being furnished and shall not be
deemed filed for the purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that Section. The
certification shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except as expressly set forth by
specific reference in such filing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leverne Williams, Also Known as “Duty,” Appellant.

[873 NYS2d 641]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered March 18, 2002, convicting him of burglary in the first degree (four counts), robbery in the first degree (four counts), and robbery in the second degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]) we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor *(see People v Mateo, 2*NY3d 383, 410 [2004], *cert denied*542 US 946 [2004]; *People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant’s contention that the People were required to provide him with notice of the identification testimony of a victim is without merit. Since there was no previous identification of the defendant by the victim, no such notice was required *(see*CPL 710.30; *People v Goodwine,*46 AD3d 702, 703 [2007]; *People v Soto, 22*AD3d 511 [2005]; *People v Romano,*282 AD2d 764, 765 [2001], *cert denied*535 US 1020 [2002]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Rivera, J.E, Spolzino, Garni and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-109177 and 333-133555) and the Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (No. 333-137696) of our report dated April 2, 2007, relating to the
consolidated financial statements of MicroIslet, Inc., (which report expresses
an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs referring to
(1) substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going
concern as discussed in Note 1, and (2) the adoption of Statement of Financials
Standards No. 123(R), SHARE-BASED PAYMENT, effective January 1, 2006) appearing
in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of MicroIslet, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2006.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
-------------------------
San Diego, California

April 6, 2007
**EXHIBIT 10.6**

 

ANDREW CORPORATION

EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFIT PLAN AGREEMENT

 

THIS AGREEMENT, made this 5th day of July, 2004, by and between AndrewCorporation (the “Company”) and John DeSana (the “Executive”),

 

WITNESSETH:

 

WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Andrew Corporation ExecutiveSeverance Benefit Plan, as amended and restated effective May 14, 2004 (the“Plan”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Executive has been designated as an eligible participantin the Plan;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Executive and Company hereby agree as follows:

 

1.                                       PlanBenefits.  The Executive has beendesignated as a TIER II Participant in the Plan and shall be eligible solelyfor the benefits set forth therein applicable to TIER II Participants.  The receipt of such benefits shall besubject to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan, including,but not limited to, terms related to the amount, time and form ofbenefits.  By execution of thisAgreement, the Executive agrees to be bound by the provisions of the Plan, asamended and restated effective May 14, 2004, and as may be subsequentlyamended.

 

2.                                       Arbitration.  The Executive acknowledges thatSection 7.2 of the Plan contains an arbitration provision, and byexecution of this Agreement agrees to be bound by the terms of such arbitrationprovision.

 

3.                                       PlanNot Contract of Employment.  ThePlan does not constitute a contract of employment and nothing in the Plan shallbe construed to give the Executive the right to be retained by the Company orto any benefits not specifically provided by the Plan.

 

4.                                       PlanSupercedes Prior Change in Control Severance Agreements.  The Executive acknowledges and agrees thatthe benefits and terms set forth in the May 14, 2004 restatement of the Plan,as applicable to the Participant based on the Tier designated in paragraph 1above, are a replacement for and in lieu of any benefits to which the Executivemay have been entitled under the Plan prior to its restatement or under anyother agreement with the Company relating to Change in Control severancebenefits.  The Executive furtheracknowledges such benefits and terms may be subsequently amended pursuant toSection 7.1 of the Plan.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to beexecuted as of the date first above written.

 
| EXECUTIVE          | ANDREW CORPORATION                           |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|               |                                         |
|               |                                         |
| /s/ John E. DeSana |                                         | /s/ Ralph E. Faison |   |
| , individually     |                                         | By: Ralph E. Faison |
|               | Its: President & Chief Executive Officer |
|                    |                                              |  |  |  |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, Hong Joon Chough, Chief Financial Officer of Axesstel, Inc. (the Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance
with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:



(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 results of operations of the Registrant.



Dated: April 19, 2004



|                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                      
|/s/    HONG JOON CHOUGH                                               
|                                                                      
|Hong Joon Chough Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to Axesstel, Inc. and will be retained by Axesstel, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of State of New York, Respondent, v Rodney J., Appellant.

[975 NYS2d 654]

— Order, Supreme Court, *561Bronx County (Colleen D. Duffy, J.), entered on or about August 30, 2012, which, upon a fact-finding that respondent is a dangerous sex offender requiring confinement, committed him to a secure treatment facility, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Clear and convincing evidence supports the finding that respondent is a dangerous sex offender requiring confinement *(see*Mental Hygiene Law § 10.03 [e]; 10.07 [f]). The evidence, including the testimony of two experts and respondent himself, established that he had committed numerous sex offenses against five victims, at least two of whom were young girls, had committed sex offenses against male inmates and patients while confined and undergoing sex offender treatment, had failed to complete any sex offender treatment program, and has a cognitive disorder causing him to believe that his victims have consented to sexual activity *(see People v Derrick S.,*93 AD3d 423 [1st Dept 2012]). Respondent presents no basis to disturb the court’s credibility determinations. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**STATMON
      TECHNOLOGIES CORP.**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**19
      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 Statmon Technologies Corp. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      Geoffrey Talbot, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18
      U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that to the best of my knowledge:




(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 results of operations of the Company.




**/s/ Geoffrey P.
              Talbot****Geoffrey P. Talbot**
              **Chief Executive Officer**
              **August 14, 2008**




A
      signed original of this written statement required by
      Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise
      adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
      of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Statmon
      Technologies Corp. and will be retained by Statmon Technologies Corp. and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request




33