alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.1


   

  Exhibit 10.1

   

  AMENDMENT TO 

  RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD AGREEMENT 

  UNDER THE MEMBERSHIP COLLECTIVE GROUP, INC. 

  2021 EQUITY AND INCENTIVE PLAN

   

  WHEREAS, Membership Collective Group, Inc. (the “Company”) previously made a grant of a restricted stock award to the undersigned (the “Holder”) pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Membership Collective Group, Inc. 2021 Equity and Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), and the terms of an award agreement,  dated as of 19 July 2021 with respect to 260,577 of Stock (the “Award Agreement”); and

  WHEREAS, the Company and the Holder desire to amend the Award Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Amendment (this “Amendment”).

  NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Award Agreement is hereby amended as follows, effective as of 28 September 2022:

   

   

  1.Section 4 of the Award Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:


   

  Restriction Period and Vesting.   The Company and the Holder agree that 195,433 of Stock out of the total Award of 260,577 has vested as at the date of this Amendment.  Except as otherwise provided in the Plan or in section 2.7 of the Settlement Agreement, by and between Holder and SoHo House UK Limited, dated 28 September 2022, the remaining Award of 65,144 shall vest in four equal installments of 16,286 on each of 1 October 2022, 1 November 2022, 1 January 2023 and 1 April 2023 (each, a “Vesting Date”).  The period of time prior to the vesting shall be referred to herein as the “Restriction Period”.  The Company and the Holder agree that for the avoidance of doubt, the vesting of the Award in accordance with this Section 4 is not conditional on the employment or engagement of the Holder by the Company, any Subsidiary or any Affiliate and in the event that this conflicts with the provisions of Plan, this Section 4 shall control.  The vesting schedule set out in the Restricted Stock Award Notice dated 19 July 2021 and accepted and signed by the Holder on 20 August 2021 shall be amended and construed in accordance with this Section 4.

   

   

     

  2.Except as set forth in this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Award Agreement as in effect immediately prior to the date hereof shall remain in full force and effect.


   

   

   

  

   

  [Signature Page Follows]

   

   

   

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date set forth above.

   

   

  MEMBERSHIP COLLECTIVE GROUP, INC. 

   

   

   

   

  By: /s/ Andrew Carnie

   

  Print Name: Andrew Carnie 

   

   

  HOLDER

   

   

   

   

   

  Signature: /s/ Martin Kuczmarski  

   

  Print Name: Martin Kuczmarski
#### § 966.3 Tenants' opportunity for comment.

Each PHA shall provide at least 30 days notice to tenants and resident organizations setting forth proposed changes in the lease form used by the PHA, and providing an opportunity to present written comments. Subject to requirements of this rule, comments submitted shall be considered by the PHA before formal adoption of any new lease form.

[56 FR 51576, Oct. 11, 1991]
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1700 What do the terms “decommissioning,” “obstructions,” “facility,” and “predecessor” mean in this subpart? ( a ) *Decommissioning* means: ( 1 ) Ending oil, gas, or sulphur operations; and
( 2 ) Returning the lease, pipeline right-of-way, or the area of a right-of-use and easement to a condition that meets the requirements of BSEE and other agencies that have jurisdiction over decommissioning activities.
( b ) *Obstructions* mean structures, equipment, or objects that were used in oil, gas, or sulphur operations or marine growth that, if left in place, would hinder other users of the OCS. Obstructions may include, but are not limited to, shell mounds, wellheads, casing stubs, mud line suspensions, well protection devices, subsea trees, jumper assemblies, umbilicals, manifolds, termination skids, production and pipeline risers, platforms, templates, pilings, pipelines, pipeline valves, and power cables.
( c ) *Facility* means any installation other than a pipeline used for oil, gas, or sulphur activities that is permanently or temporarily attached to the seabed on the OCS. Facilities include production and pipeline risers, templates, pilings, and any other facility or equipment that constitutes an obstruction such as jumper assemblies, termination skids, umbilicals, anchors, and mooring lines.
( d ) *Predecessor* means a prior lessee or owner of operating rights, or a prior holder of a right-of-use and easement grant or a pipeline right-of-way grant, that is liable for accrued obligations on that lease or grant.
[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011, as amended at 88 FR 23579, Apr. 18, 2023]
# ORIGINAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22-0629
BILLY BUDD SULLIVAN and HARRY RICHARDS,

Plaintiffs and Appellants, 

# FILPD FE3 16 2023 Bow , :2nvv0OCI

_,,erne Court vinntana
v. ORDER ALICIA DORMAN and JASON FORTNEY,

Defendants and Appellees. Appearing as self-represented litigants, Appellants Billy Budd Sullivan and Harry Richards filed a Request for Production ofTranscripts along with their Notice ofAppeal on November 22, 2022. They requested the transcript ofthe September 1, 2022 hearing that occurred in the District Court. However, instead ofcertifying that they made arrangements with the court reporter to pay for the transcripts, one ofthe Appellants wrote "NO I have NOT" on the form. AsAppellants, Sullivan and Richards beartheresponsibilitytomake arrangementsto pay the court reporter to prepare the transcripts. M. R. App. P. 8(3) and 9(1). Although Appellants requested, and obtained, waiver ofthe filing fee for appeal to this Court, such waiver does not entitle the party to waive other fees or costs, including the cost oftranscript preparation. M. R. App. P. 5(5). Although we recognize the burden on litigants oflimited means when they must procure funds on their own to secure a transcript for appeal, there is no provision in Montana law that allows transcripts to be provided in a civil matter such as this one at no cost to the appellant. Aside from the transcript, the District Courttransmittedtheremainder oftherecordto this Court on January 6, 2023. Appellants must either timely make payment arrangements 02/16/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0629with the court reporter for preparation ofthe transcript or proceed with this appeal on the

remainder ofthe record. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, on or beforeMarch 16, 2023, Appellants shall file a report on th'e status of this appeal that informs the Court as to the status of the transcripts. Failure to file a statUs report within that time will result in dismissal of this appeal with prejudice and without further notice. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy ofthis Orderto counsel ofrecord, andtoBilly Budd Sullivan and Harry Richards: DATED this 16th day ofFebruary, 2023.
For the Court,

ChiefJustic

2
(March 20, 1978)

#### Elizabeth R. Baecher, Respondent, v John J. Baecher, Jr., Appellant.

In a matrimonial action in which the plaintiff-respondent was previously granted a judgment of divorce, defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 29,1976, as granted plaintiff’s motion for entry of a money judgment for accrued arrears of alimony, awarded her a counsel fee and denied defendant’s cross motion to modify the judgment of divorce and (2) from an order of the same court, dated April 11, 1977, which, *inter alia,*granted the plaintiff exclusive occupancy of the marital home until title to those premises is transferred to a third party and directed the defendant to execute a contract of sale of the marital home for $75,000 or be punished for contempt. Order dated December 29, 1976 modified, on the law, by reducing the amount of accrued arrears from the sum of $1,000 to the sum of $600. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from. Order dated April 11, 1977 modified by deleting therefrom the following: "that defendant execute a contract of sale for the marital home for $75,000” and by substituting therefor a direction that defendant execute a contract of sale for the marital home upon receipt of the first genuine offer over the sum of $75,000 or that he purchase plaintiff’s interest in the property at a price commensurate with such offer. As so modified, order affirmed. Plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs to cover both appeals. Since the alimony and child support provisions of the original judgment of divorce were reduced on a prior appeal to this court *(Baecher*v *Baecher,*58 AD2d 821), the order dated December 29, 1976, which directed the entry of judgment for accrued arrears in the sum of $1,000 based on the provisions of the original *1022judgment of divorce, must be reduced to the amount indicated herein. With regard to the order dated April 11, 1977, the record indicates that several offers have been made to purchase the premises for amounts substantially in excess of the $75,000 referred to in the order under review. The defendant should not be compelled to accept a depressed purchase price. On the other hand, he cannot be allowed to frustrate the expeditious sale of the premises. To insure that the marital premises is sold in an expeditious manner, and at the fairest price, the order under review has been modified to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, J. P., Suozzi, Hargett and Hawkins, JJ., concur.
#### MIX v. HAMBURG-AMERICAN PACKET CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 24, 1905.)

Action by Barbara Mix, as administratrix, against the Hamburg-American Packet Company. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.
§ 964.220 Technical assistance. ( a ) *Financial assistance.* HUD will provide financial assistance, to the extent available, to resident councils or resident management corporations for technical assistance and training to further the activities under this subpart.
( b ) *Requirements for a management specialist.* If a resident council or resident management corporation seeks to manage a development, it must select, in consultation with the HA, a qualified housing management specialist to assist in determining the feasibility of, and to help establish, a resident management corporation and to provide training and other duties in connection with the daily operations of the project.
Exhibit
23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-122582 pertaining to
the Nalco Holding Company Stock Incentive Plan and the Registration
Statements (Form S-1 No.  333-126642 and No. 333-118583, Form S-3
No. 333-130715) of Nalco Holding Company and in the related Prospectus
of our reports dated February 28, 2006, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedules of Nalco Holding
Company, Nalco Holding Company management’s assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Nalco
Holding Company, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December  31,  2005.

/s/
ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Chicago, Illinois
February  28,  2006

---
Editorial Note on Part 888
Editorial Note: For revisions and amendments affecting Schedules A, B, C, and D, issued under part 888, but not carried in the Code of Federal Regulations, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*

§ 888.315 Restrictions on retroactive payments. ( a ) *Restrictions on distribution of surplus cash.* Retroactive payments for HUD-insured projects and other projects subject to limitations on the distribution of surplus cash will be deposited, in the manner of Housing Assistance Payments, into the appropriate project account. The payments will be subject to HUD rules and procedures (or rules and procedures of other agencies, as appropriate), described in the applicable regulations and the HAP contracts, for distribution of surplus cash to project owners.
( b ) *Replacement reserve.* Projects required by HUD regulations to maintain a reserve for replacement account and to adjust the annual payment to the account each year by the amount of the annual rent adjustment must deposit into the account the proportionate share of any retroactive payment received, in accordance with HUD regulations and the HAP contract.
( c ) *Physical condition of HUD-insured or State-financed projects.* If the most recent physical inspection report of a HUD-insured project, completed by the mortgagee, or by HUD or the Contract Administrator if a mortgagee inspection is not present, shows significant deficiencies that have not been addressed to the satisfaction of HUD by the date the retroactive payment is deposited into the project account, the payment will not be made available for surplus cash distribution until the deficiencies are resolved or a plan for their resolution has been approved by HUD.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 327

To allow binding arbitration clauses to be included in all contracts affecting 

land within the Gila River Indian Community Reservation. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 25, 2005

Mr. GRIJALVA (for himself and Mr. HAYWORTH) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To allow binding arbitration clauses to be included in all 

contracts affecting land within the Gila River Indian 

Community Reservation.

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

3 SECTION 1. BINDING ARBITRATION FOR GILA RIVER IN4 DIAN COMMUNITY RESERVATION CON5 TRACTS. 

6 (a) AMENDMENTS.—Subsection (f) of the first sec7 tion of the Act of August 9, 1955 (25 U.S.C. 415(f)), is 

8 amended—

9 (1) in the first sentence—
2

•HR 327 IH 

1 (A) by striking ‘‘Any lease’’ and all that 

2 follows through ‘‘affecting land’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘Any contract, including a lease, affecting 

4 land’’; and 

5 (B) by striking ‘‘such lease or contract’’ 

6 and inserting ‘‘such contract’’; and 

7 (2) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘Such 

8 leases or contracts entered into pursuant to such 

9 Acts’’ and inserting ‘‘Such contracts’’. 

10 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

11 subsection (a) shall take effect as if included in Public 

12 Law 107–159 (116 Stat. 122).

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

 

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

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of General Communication, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald A. Duncan, 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: 

 

|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

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

 

 

| Date:  November 30, 2006 | /s/ Ronald A. Duncan        |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------|
|                     | Ronald A. Duncan            |
|                     | Chief Executive Officer     |
|                     | General Communication, Inc. |

 

 

 

1
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

 

In connection with the Quarterly Reportof NeoMedia Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Laura A. Marriott, does hereby certify, pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to her knowledge:

 

1.              TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.              Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operationof the Company.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

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.

January 20, 2021

b0113 

# Order

Clerk January 20, 2021

161983

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 161983

COA: 353663

Oakland CC: 2003

- 189994

- FC

JAMES EDWARD TERRY,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the Augus t 20, 2020 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting

leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals to address: (1) whether

the Oakland Circuit Court had statutory authority under MCL 7 69.1k to issue the August

28, 2018 amended order to remit prisoner funds; and (2) if so, whether setting the amount

of attorney fees several years after sentencing violates due process. People v Jackson , 483

Mich 271, 292 (2009).

On remand, while retainin g jurisdiction, the Court of Appeals shall remand this case

to the Oakland Circuit Court and direct that court to appoint counsel to represent the

defendant in the Court of Appeals. We direct the Court of Appeals’ attention to the fact

that we have also r emanded People v Nye (Docket No. 161267) to the Court of Appeals for

consideration of similar issues.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
#### George Triantafillopoulos, Respondent, v Sala Corporation, Doing Business as WIK, Appellant.

[832 NYS2d 438]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), entered July 25, 2006, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see Baillargeon v Kings County Waterproofing Corp.,*29 AD3d 838 [2006]; *Cupo v Karfunkel,*1 AD3d 48, 51 [2003]). The defendant’s claim that its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been granted on the basis of its affirmative defense of assumption of the risk is not properly before us, as it was raised for the first time on appeal. Moreover, the issue does not involve a pure question of law “which appeared on the face of the record and which could not have been avoided by [the respondent] if brought to [its] attention at the proper juncture” *(Block v Magee,*146 AD2d 730, 732 [1989] [internal quotation marks omitted]; *see Kremerov v Forest View Nursing Home, Inc.,*24 AD3d 618, 620 [2005]; *Rashford v City of Utica,*23 AD3d 1000, 1001 [2005]; *Prosser v County of Erie,*244 AD2d 942, 943 [1997]). Spolzino, J.P., Goldstein, Fisher and McCarthy, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 23.1



                      INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


    We consent to the incorporation by reference in this
Registration Statement of Baker Hughes Incorporated on Form S-8 of
our report dated February 17, 1999 (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to
the change in the method of accounting for impairment of long-lived
assets to be disposed of to conform with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 121, as discussed in Note 2), incorporated
by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Baker Hughes
Incorporated for the year ended December 31, 1998.



Deloitte & Touche LLP



Houston, Texas
June 24, 1999
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          73,510
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     39,543
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               546,959
<PP&E>                                      13,455,900
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,851,747
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,906,875
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,447,430
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        65,490
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,122,899)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,906,875
<SALES>                                      2,959,440
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,959,440
<CGS>                                        2,817,588
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,262,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,481,942
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,602,590)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,602,590)
<DISCONTINUED>                               (235,284)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,837,874)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.43)


</TABLE>