alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.26


 


Description
of Compensation of Non-Employee Trustees


 


Each Trustee who is not also an
officer and full-time employee of Corporate Office Properties Trust (the “Company”)
receives the fees set forth in the table below until changed by the Board of
Trustees:


 




	
  Annual trustee fee

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  22,000

  	
   

  
	
  Annual committee chairman fees

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Audit committee

  	
   

  	
  7,500

  	
   

  
	
  Compensation committee

  	
   

  	
  5,000

  	
   

  
	
  Investment committee

  	
   

  	
  5,000

  	
   

  
	
  Nomination/corporate governance

  	
   

  	
  2,500

  	
   

  
	
  Board meeting fees

  	
   

  	
  1,000

  	
   

  
	
  Committee meeting fees

  	
   

  	
  1,000

  	
   

  






 


The members of the Board of
Trustees are also eligible for reimbursement for travel and lodging expenses
incurred in connection with attendance at Board and committee meetings.  In addition, until changed by the Board of
Trustees, all non-employee Trustees will receive an annual grant of 5,000
options to purchase the Company’s common shares of beneficial interest at an
exercise price equal to the fair market value on the date of grant; this grant
takes place on the day of the Company’s annual meeting of shareholders.  These options vest 100% one year from the
date of grant.
Case 3:98-cr-00063-RV   Document 255   Filed 08/04/06   Page 1 of 1
§ 301.74-4 Conditions governing the interstate movement of regulated articles from quarantined areas. The interstate movement of any regulated article from a quarantined area[1] is prohibited except when: ( a ) The regulated article is moved by the United States Department of Agriculture: ( 1 ) For an experimental or scientific purpose;
( 2 ) Pursuant to a Departmental permit issued by the Administrator for the regulated article;
( 3 ) Under conditions specified on the Departmental permit and found by the Administrator to be adequate to prevent the spread of plum pox; and
( 4 ) With a tag or label bearing the number of the Departmental permit issued for the regulated article attached to the outside of the container of the regulated article or attached to the regulated article itself if not in a container; or
( b ) The regulated article originated outside the quarantined area and: ( 1 ) Is moved in an enclosed vehicle or is completely enclosed by a covering (such as canvas, plastic, or other closely woven cloth) adequate to prevent access by aphids or other transmission agents of plum pox while in the quarantined area;
( 2 ) The regulated article's point of origin is indicated on the waybill; and
( 3 ) The regulated article must not be uncovered, unpacked, or unloaded while moving through the quarantined area.
[74 FR 27073, June 8, 2009, as amended at 87 FR 80009, Dec. 29, 2022] Footnotes -
301.74-4
[1] Requirements under all other applicable Federal domestic plant quarantines and regulations must also be met.
exhibit 10(h)




Exhibit
10(h)

AMENDMENT

TO

EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT

 

This
Amendment to Employment Agreement is entered into effective as of the 28th day
of February, 2003, by and between TXU Corp., a Texas corporation (the
“Company”), and M. S. Greene, an individual (“Employee”).

 

WHEREAS,
the Company and Employee entered into that certain Employment Agreement dated as
of July 1, 2000, as amended pursuant to that certain Amendment to Employment
Agreement dated as of May 11, 2001 (“Employment Agreement”); and

 

WHEREAS,
the parties now desire to amend the Employment Agreement to extend the Term such
that the Term shall expire on the third anniversary of the effective date of
this Amendment to Employment Agreement.

 

NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements set forth herein and in the
Employment Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as
follows:

 


	 	
      1.
	
      Extension
      of Term.
      Section 2 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended by replacing the
      date “June 30, 2004” with the date “the third anniversary of the effective
      date of the Amendment to Employment Agreement dated in February 2003,”
      and, as amended, said Section 2 shall be and read in full as
      follows:




 

“2.
Term: This
Employment Agreement shall commence as of the date first set forth above and,
unless terminated earlier pursuant to the provisions hereof, shall expire on the
third anniversary of the effective date of the Amendment to Employment Agreement
dated in February 2003 (“Term”).”

 


	 	
      2.
	
      Continued
      Effectiveness of Employment Agreement.
      Except as expressly amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain
      in full force and effect.




 


	 	
      3.
	
      Governing
      Law.
      This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
      laws of the State of Texas.




 

Executed
effective as of the 28th day of
February, 2003.

 

TXU
CORP.       EMPLOYEE:







By:/s/
Erle
Nye                                        /s/ M.
S.
Greene                                  
 

Erle Nye,
Chairman of the Board     M. S.
Greene 


and Chief
Executive
H. R. 2167 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen 

An Act 

To authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to establish additional requirements to improve the fiscal safety and soundness of the home 

equity conversion mortgage insurance program. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reverse Mortgage Stabilization 

Act of 2013’’. 

SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL SAFETY AND SOUNDNESS REQUIREMENTS FOR 

HOME EQUITY CONVERSION MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM. 

Subsection (h) of section 255 of the National Housing Act (12 

U.S.C. 1715z–20(h)) is amended— 

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end 

and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

‘‘(3) establish, by notice or mortgagee letter, any additional 

or alternative requirements that the Secretary, in the Secretary’s discretion, determines are necessary to improve the 

fiscal safety and soundness of the program authorized by this 

section, which requirements shall take effect upon issuance.’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
§ 205.620 Requirements of State organic programs. ( a ) A State may establish a State organic program for production and handling operations within the State which produce and handle organic agricultural products.
( b ) A State organic program must meet the requirements for organic programs specified in the Act.
( c ) A State organic program may contain more restrictive requirements because of environmental conditions or the necessity of specific production or handling practices particular to the State or region of the United States.
( d ) A State organic program must assume enforcement obligations in the State for the requirements of this part and any more restrictive requirements approved by the Secretary.
( e ) A State organic program and any amendments to such program must be approved by the Secretary prior to being implemented by the State.
#### § 28.190 Advance deposits.

Advance deposit requirements for services rendered under this subpart are specified in § 28.121.

[81 FR 7031, Feb. 10, 2016]
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 19

- 0675

_________________ ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v. JESUS CHUEY VILLANUEVA,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ This Court reviews briefs to ensure compliance with Rules 11 and 12 of the Montana Rules of Appellate Procedure. After reviewing the Appellee’s response brief filed electronically on June 23, 2021 , this Court has determined that the brief does not comply with the below

-referenced Rule and must be resubmitted. M. R. App. P. 12(1)(h) requires a short conclusion stating the precise relief sought

. Appell ee ’s brief does not contain a conclusion or a statement of the relief sought

. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the referenced brief is rejected. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) days of the date of this Order the Appellee shall electronically file with the Clerk of this Court a revised brief containing the revisions necessary to comply with the speci fied R ule and that the Appellee shall serve copies of the revised brief on all parties of record ; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no changes, additions , or deletions other than those specified in this Order may be made to the brief as originally filed; and IT I S FURTHER ORDERED that the times for any subsequent briefing contained in M. R. App. P. 13 shall run from the date of filing of the revised brief. The Clerk is directed to provide a true copy of this Order to the Appellee and to all counsel of record.

Electronically signed by: Beth Baker Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 24 2021

06/24/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0675
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Louise Jowdy v. Hermelinda Rossi, USAA, USAA County Mutual 

Insurance Company, USAA Casualty Insurance Company

Appellate case number: 01-19-00715-CV

Trial court case number: 2017-43825

Trial court: 80th District Court of Harris County

Appellant filed a motion for extension on September 8, 2020, requesting a 21-day extension 

of time to file appellant’s brief. The Court granted this extension on the same day, noting that no 

further extensions would be granted. Later the same day, appellant filed another motion, this time 

requesting 30, rather than 21 days. Appellant requested this additional time in part because 

documents are missing from the clerk’s record and appellant is attempting to correct that.

Accordingly, the Court withdraws its ruling of September 8, 2020, granting the 21-day 

extension and noting that no further extensions would be granted. Instead, the Court grants 

appellant’s latest motion and sets the new deadline for filing the brief as October 15, 2020. No 

further extensions will be granted absent a showing of exceptional circumstances.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ____/s/ Richard Hightower________

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __September 15, 2020___
#### § 29.1125 Rule 19.

Any lot of tobacco containing 20 percent or more of green tobacco, or any lot which is not crude but contains 20 percent or more of green and crude combined shall be designated by the color symbols “G,” “GR,” “GK,” “GG,” or the combination symbols “GL,” or “GF.”
#### Charlotte Brody *v.*William Williams et al.

*Sydney T. Schulman,*in support of the motion.

Submitted October 21

decided October 27, 1971

The motion by the defendants for review of the action of the Circuit Court in the fourteenth circuit dismissing their appeal and terminating a stay of execution for their failure to post an appellate bond is denied in the absence of a finding. See Practice Book § 694.
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and
Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This certification is not to
be deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and does not
constitute a part of the annual report on Form 10-K (the Report) accompanying
this letter.

Kevin J. McAndrew, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of Canterbury Consulting Group, Inc., certifies that:

1.   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 Canterbury
Consulting Group, Inc. (as of and for the periods presented in the Report).


                     /s/ Kevin J. McAndrew
                     ----------------------------------------
                         Kevin J. McAndrew
                         President and Chief Executive Officer

                     /s/ Kevin J. McAndrew
                     ----------------------------------------
			Chief Financial Officer


Date: February 27, 2004
**Exhibit 32(a)**


**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 filing of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Alpha NR
      Holding, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2006, with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael
      J. Quillen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 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.





The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
      and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
      document.


/s/
                Michael J. QuillenMichael
                J. Quillen*President
                and Chief Executive Officer**(Principal
                Executive Officer)*


Date:
      November 9, 2006





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.









-37-
#### Alfred Toker, Appellant, v Harry R. Pollak, et al., Respondents.

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 22, 1979, modified, in the exercise of discretion, to deny the motion for a protective order covering records and proceedings of movant Mayor’s Committee on the Judiciary, subject however to conditions hereinafter set forth, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. As its name indicates, the committee passes upon qualifications of persons seeking designation by the Mayor to the Benches of the local courts. This suit is for defamation in that defendants-respondents are said to have given derogatory information to the committee concerning plaintiff-appellant’s qualifications for judicial office. When plaintiff attempted to secure information concerning such a communication, a claim of privilege was raised, held by our highest court to be qualified (44 NY2d 211). Plaintiff served subpoenas duces tecum upon third-party witnesses, i.e., the committee and certain members, to appear for examination before trial and for production of committee records in order to assemble evidence to sustain his case. By motion for a protective order to quash the subpoenas, the matter came on before Special Term, which sustained the proposed depositions, "solely as to the receipt and substance of any communication from defendants, concerning plaintiff, be they written or oral,” while granting a protective order "striking the documents set out and sought in the subpoena.” Obviously, without evidence of what, if anything, was communicated by defendants to the committee, and how, if at all, plaintiff was damaged thereby, an innocent plaintiff in similar circumstances would be without recourse at all in the face of a protective order cutting off access to all or part of such information. Thus, plaintiff may properly discover and examine. However, because of the public interest nature of the matter, unbridled discovery could conceivably do damage to the usual-functioning of a most valuable institution. Accordingly, we modify to dissolve the protective order, leaving it to the Justice presiding to determine, *in camera,*the relevance of the material sought. To assure consistency and to promote judicial economy, we direct that one Justice shall be designated to decide all such questions. The area of relevance is as defined by Special Term. Though, conceivably, the time may come when it may be relevant to ascertain what action, if any, was taken by the committee in response to communications received, the question of damages is not now—and may never be—relevant. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Fein, Sullivan and Markewich, JJ.
#### § 28.36 Order of classification.

All samples for which classification requests are pending shall be classified, as far as practicable, in the order in which the samples are delivered for classification. When in the opinion of the Area Director or Quality Assurance Director there is a need to deviate from this order of classification, the director shall designate which samples will be given priority in classification.

[81 FR 7029, Feb. 10, 2016]
§ 205.502 Applying for accreditation. ( a ) A private or governmental entity seeking accreditation as a certifying agent under this subpart must submit an application for accreditation which contains the applicable information and documents set forth in §§ 205.503 through 205.505 and the fees required in § 205.640 to: Program Manager, USDA-AMS-NOP, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Room 2648 So. Bldg., Ag Stop 0268, Washington, DC 20250-0268.
( b ) Following the receipt of the information and documents, the Administrator will determine, pursuant to § 205.506, whether the applicant for accreditation should be accredited as a certifying agent.
[65 FR 80637, Dec. 21, 2000, as amended at 80 FR 6429, Feb. 5, 2015]
### Fw: Proposed Ozone regulations Jackie Ashley to: Tricia Crabtree 01/08/2010 04:10 PM

Tricia - Below is an email comment that we may want to add to the ozone docket once it opens. Thanks!

_

_________________________________ _ Jackie Ashley Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards US EPA ashley.j ackie@epa.gov 919-541-7664 ----- Forwarded by Jackie Ashley/RTP/USEPA/US on 01/08/2010 04:09 PM -----

From: Cathy Milbourn/DC/USEPA/US To: Andrea Drinkard/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Jackie Ashley/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 01/08/2010 04:02 PM Subject: Fw: Proposed Ozone regulations another fort the docket ----- Forwarded by Cathy Milbourn/DC/USEPA/US on 01/08/2010 03:48 PM -----

From: "dparnellm@gmail.com" <dparnellm@gmail.com> To: Cathy Milbourn/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 01/08/2010 03:46 PM Subject: Proposed Ozone regulations


### Dear Ms. Milbourn, I want to thank the EPA for its proposal to our nation's ozone regulations. As someone with asthma who believes in sanctity of human life, I hope that this proposal will be enacted. A future of cleaner air is something we can all look forward to. Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts. Sincerely, Daniel McCarter
#### § 30.18 Injury.

Hurt or impairment from any cause except the fungous or bacterial diseases which attack tobacco in its cured state. Injured tobacco shall include any dead, burnt, or ragged tobacco; or tobacco that has been torn or broken, frozen or frosted, sunburned or scalded, scorched or fire-killed, bulk-burnt or stem-burnt, pole burnt or house burnt, bleached or bruised; or tobacco containing discolored or deformed leaves; or tobacco hurt by insects; or tobacco affected by wild-fire, black fire, rust, frogeye, mosaic, frenching, sanddrown, or other field diseases.
#### § 1786.25 Purpose.

This subpart contains the general regulations of the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) for implementing the provisions of (a) section 306(A) of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (RE Act); (b) section 633 of the Rural Development, Agriculture, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1988 (Pub. L. 100-202) (the continuing resolution); and (c) section 637 of the Rural Development, Agriculture, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1989 (Pub. L. 100-460) (the 1989 Appropriations Act) which permit, in certain circumstances, loans made by the Federal Financing Bank (FFB) and guaranteed by the Administrator of RUS to be prepaid by RUS electric and telephone borrowers by paying the outstanding principal balance due on the FFB loan, using a private loan with the existing RUS guarantees or using internally generated funds.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2069 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2069

 To amend the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Assistance 
Act of 1978 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to waive certain 
                       eligibility requirements.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2013

 Mr. Benishek introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Assistance 
Act of 1978 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to waive certain 
                       eligibility requirements.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE TRIBALLY CONTROLLED COLLEGES AND 
              UNIVERSITIES ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1978.

    Section 103 of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities 
Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1804) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``To be eligible'' and inserting ``(a) To 
        be eligible''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
    ``(b) The Secretary may waive the eligibility requirements set 
forth in subsection (a) for a period of not more than 7 years upon 
request by a tribally controlled college or university--
            ``(1) that has received assistance under this title for 10 
        consecutive years;
            ``(2) that is located on Indian lands;
            ``(3) that is located in a county that has an Indian 
        population that did not decrease by more than one percent 
        during the interval between the two most recent decennial 
        censuses of population under section 141 of the title 13, 
        United States Code; and
            ``(4) for which the Secretary has determined that such a 
        waiver will support higher education opportunities appropriate 
        to the needs of Indians.
    ``(c) The Secretary shall approve or deny an application for a 
waiver under subsection (b) within 30 days of receipt of such an 
application or such application shall be deemed to be approved.''.
                                 <all>
```