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

 

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), is entered into as of February 24, 2015 by and among First Busey Corporation (“First Busey”), Busey Bank (the “Bank,” and together with First Busey, “Employer”) and John J. Powers (“Executive”).

 

RECITALS

 

A.            Employer and Executive entered into an Employment Agreement effective as of December 31, 2011 (the “Employment Agreement”), pursuant to which Executive serves as Executive Vice President, General Counsel.

 

B.            Employer and Executive wish to amend certain terms and provisions of the Employment Agreement.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the respective covenants and agreements of the parties contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

 

1.             Section 4(g)(i) of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:

 

(i)            If this Agreement and Executive’s employment hereunder are terminated by Employer without Cause pursuant to Section 4(a), or by Executive for Good Reason pursuant to Section 4(c), Employer shall pay Executive an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) (or two hundred percent (200%) if the foregoing terminations occur within one (1) year after the occurrence of a Change in Control) of the sum of (A) Executive’s then applicable Base Salary, plus (B) the amount of the most recent performance bonus that Employer paid to Executive pursuant to Section 3(b) (the “Severance Payment”).  Employer shall also reimburse Executive for up to twelve (12) months (or eighteen (18) months if the foregoing terminations occur within one (1) year after the occurrence of a Change in Control) for continuing coverage under Employer’s health insurance pursuant to the health care continuation rules of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (“COBRA”), provided that Executive remains eligible for, and elects, such COBRA continuation for such period following the effective date of termination, provided further that to the extent Executive paid a portion of the premium for such benefit while employed Executive shall continue to pay such portion during the period of continuation hereunder and any period of continuation hereunder shall be credited against the continuation rights under COBRA.

 

2.             Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

 

[Signatures on Next Page]

 











 

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

 

	
FIRST   BUSEY CORPORATION and
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
BUSEY   BANK
    	
 
    	
EXECUTIVE
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
By:
    	
 /s/ VAN A. DUKEMAN
    	
 
    	
/s/ JOHN J.   POWERS
    
	
 
    	
Van A. Dukeman
    	
 
    	
John J. Powers
    
	
 
    	
President and   Chief Executive Officer Of First Busey Corporation
38793.

#### ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY v. PAULK, by Next Friend.

Decided September 6, 1961.

*Larry E. Pedrick, H. J. Quincey, Jack Helms,*for plaintiff in error.

*Vickers Neug-ent, Robert B.*Summer, contra.

Jordan, Judge.

1. Under the allegations of the petition in this case, which was not demurred to, a cause of action was set forth for negligence as well as for wilful and wanton misconduct. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict which *317was based upon the ground that the evidence demanded a finding that the defendant was not guilty of wilful and wanton misconduct.

2. Likewise, the trial court did not err, as contended in special ground 4 of the amended motion for new trial, in charging the jury that the plaintiff was entitled to present her proof under either theory of the petition.

3. The court did err in charging in effect *Code*§ 94-1108, which provides “In all actions against railroad companies for damages done to persons or property, proof of injury inflicted by the running of locomotives or cars of such companies shall be prima facie evidence of the want of reasonable skill and care on the part of the servants of the companies in reference to such injury.” This Code section “casts upon the railway company the burden of the duty of producing some evidence to the contrary; and when that is done the inference is at end, and the question of negligence is one for the jury from all the evidence. When all of the facts touching the injury inflicted are in evidence, both from the testimony of the plaintiff and of the defendant, the court should not give this statute in charge to the jury.” *Seaboard Air-Line Ry. Co. v. Fountain,*173 Ga. 593 (2b) (160 SE 789). Since the defendant railway introduced evidence tending to rebut the negligence alleged against it and introduced material facts connected with the collision, the principle set out in *Code*§ 94-1108 had no place in this case and the court erred in charging thereon. *Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Rowe,*83 Ga. App. 540 (64 SE2d 216); *Central of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Cooper,*45 Ga. App. 806, 807 (4) (165 SE 858); *Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Parker,*90 Ga. App. 251 (2) (82 SE2d 706).

4. The general grounds of the motion for new trial are not passed on, as the case is to be tried again, except to say that the verdict rendered was not demanded by the evidence.

For the reasons stated in division 3 of this opinion the trial court erred in denying the amended motion for new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Townsend,P. J.,and Frankum, J., concur.*
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 9601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4394]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notices

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

DATE & TIME: Thursday, March 4, 2010, at 11 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This hearing will be open to the public.

Audit Hearing: AFL-CIO Cope Political Contributions Committee.

DATE & TIME: Thursday, March 4, 2010, at 2 p.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This hearing will be open to the public.

Audit Hearing: The Jefferson Committee.
    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such 
as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, 
should contact Darlene Harris, Acting Commission Secretary, at (202) 
694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the hearing date.

Person to Contact for Information: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Darlene Harris,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-4394 Filed 3-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
§ 556.420 Monensin. ( a ) *Acceptable daily intake (ADI).* The ADI for total residue of monensin is 12.5 μg/kg of body weight per day.
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for monensin are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* ( i ) Liver: 0.10 ppm.
( ii ) Muscle, kidney, and fat: 0.05 ppm.
( iii ) Milk: Not required.
( 2 ) *Chickens and turkeys.* Edible tissues (excluding eggs): Not required.
( 3 ) *Goats.* Edible tissues (excluding milk): 0.05 ppm.
( 4 ) *Quail.* Edible tissues (excluding eggs): Not required.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See § 558.355 of this chapter.
§ 582.1324 Glyceryl monostearate. ( a ) *Product.* Glyceryl monostearate.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
# C_2014052EN.01005403.xml

| 22.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/54

---

Action brought on 6 January 2014 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-1/14)

2014/C 52/108

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of EPSO not to admit the applicant to the assessment stage because of her level of education which corresponds to completed university studies of at least three years attested to by a diploma relevant to the post, or equivalent training/an equivalent professional qualification relevant to the post.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the selection board of 3 October 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the selection board of 3 October 2013;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the sum of EUR 1 000 in respect of non-pecuniary harm suffered by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the sum of EUR 1 000 in respect of non-pecuniary harm suffered by the applicant;

| — | Rule on the costs, expenses and fees and, having regard to the vexatory nature of the defendant’s decision to refuse to admit the applicant, order the Commission to pay them. |
| --- | --- |

—

Rule on the costs, expenses and fees and, having regard to the vexatory nature of the defendant’s decision to refuse to admit the applicant, order the Commission to pay them.

---
Exhibit 15.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements (Form F-3 No. 333-118932 and Form S-8 No. 333-106591) of Deutsche Telekom AG and in the related Prospectuses of our reports dated February 28, 2008 relating to the consolidated financial
statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of the Company included in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2007.

February 28, 2008



|                                                                                            |  |                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------
|Ernst & Young AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft Steuerberatungsgesellschaft Stuttgart      |  |                          
|                                                                                            | 
|/s/ Prof. Dr. Pfitzer                                                                       |  | /s/ Forst                
|(Prof. Dr. Pfitzer) Wirtschaftsprüfer                                                       |  | (Forst) Wirtschaftsprüfer
|                                                                                            | 
|PricewaterhouseCoopers Aktiengesellschaft Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft Frankfurt am Main |  |                          
|                                                                                            | 
|/s/ Frings                                                                                  |  | /s/ Menke                
|(Frings) Wirtschaftsprüfer                                                                  |  | (Menke) Wirtschaftsprüfer
1 NO. 03

- 14 -00407- CR

JERRYL ROBINSON § IN THE THIRD

V. § DISTRICT COURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS § APPEALS OF TEXAS

STATE’S FOURTH MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT:

Now comes the State of Texas, Appellee in the above styled and numbered

cause, and moves for an extension of time of 10 days to file Appellee’s brief, and

for good cause would show the following:

I.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of Theft > $1,500 <

$20,000. The offense was enhanced from a state jail felony to a second-degree

felony, and Appellant was sentenced to 15 years confinement on June 11, 2014

. Appellant’s brief was originally due November 3, 2014. After two motions for

extension were granted by the Court, Appellant filed his brief on February 9, 2015.

II.

I am handling the appeal for the State in this case

.
Since filing the last 16-day motion for extension, I had a contested expunction

hearing on the 21 st

. I attended an appellate law conference in Austin over three

days at the end May, and I sat second chair for oral argument in 03- 14 -00669-CR ACCEPTED 03-14-00407-CR 5574969 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 6/8/2015 8:07:49 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK2

on June 3, 2015. I also helped review and file another attorney’s brief in 03

- 14

-

00192

- CR. Last week I had an unexpected acquittal expunction brought to my

attention on Wednesday with a hearing scheduled the following morning; although

the contested hearing was reset for this Thursday, I had to prepare and file an

answer. I have also had several other expunctions and nondisclosures to review.

Although I have performed some additional work on the brief in the instant cause

over the weekend, I have not yet been able to compl ete it. I will work through the

coming weekend if necessary to complete the brief by Monday the 15 th

. In light of

the foregoing, I respec tfully request an extension of 10 days to file the State’s

brief. This is the fourth exten sion sought by Appellee.

III

.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the State’s counsel

respect fully prays for an extension of 10 days, until June 1 5

, 201 5 , so that an

adequate response may be made to Appellant’s brief. This extension is not

requested for purposes of delay but so that ju stice may be done.

R espectfully submitted,

/s/ Joshua D. Presley Joshua D. Presley SBN: 24088254 preslj@co.comal.tx.us Comal Criminal District Attorney ’s Office 150 N. Seguin Avenue, Suite 307 New Braunfels, Texas 78130 Ph: (830) 221

- 1300 / Fax: (830) 608

- 20083 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Joshua D. Presley

, Assistant D istrict A ttorney for the State of Texas,

Appellee, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this State’s Fourth Motion

to Extend Time to File Brief has been delivered t o Appellant JERRYL

ROBINSON ’s attorney in this matter :

Marilee H. Brown Marilee@hazelbrownlaw.com Hazel Brown Wright Reneau, PLLC 391 Landa Street New Braunfels, TX 78130 Counsel for Appellant on Appeal

B y electronically sending it to the above

- listed email address through

efile.txcourts .gov , this 8 th day of June

, 2015

.

/s/ Joshua D. Presley Joshua D. Presley
THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Post Office Box 12248

Austin, Texas 78711

(512) 463-1312

June 17, 2016

Mr. Scott A. Brister

Andrews Kurth LLP

111 Congress Avenue, Suite 1700

Austin, TX 78701

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Mr. Mark R. Steiner

Jackson Walker, L.P.

2323 Ross Avenue, Suite 600

Dallas, TX 75202

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Case Number: 14-0539

Court of Appeals Number: 05-11-01730-CV

Trial Court Number: 11-04339

Style: CORNERSTONE HEALTHCARE GROUP HOLDING, INC.

v.

NAUTIC PARTNERS VI, L.P., RELIANT SPLITTER, L.P., AND KENNEDY PLAZA

PARTNERS VI, L.P.

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas issued an opinion and judgment in the above-referenced

cause. You may obtain a copy of the opinion and judgment through Case Search on our Court’s webpage

at: http://www.txcourts.gov/supreme.aspx. On the Case Search page simply enter the case number and

push the Search button to find the docket page for your case. The Emergency Motion to Seal is dismissed

as moot.

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

cc: Mr. Patrick F. Philbin (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Michael Brohm (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Manuel Diaz (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Ralph Ritch Roberts III (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. John Michael Helms Jr. (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Mark W. Bayer (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Cliff Aycock, Jr. (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Keith A. Clouse (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Ryan Patrick Brohm (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Jonathan C. LaMendola (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Ms. Lisa Matz (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Gary Fitzsimmons (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

FILE COPY
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOne-Third-Octave Analysis of Core/Combustor-Noise Measurements for the DGEN Aeropropulsion Research Turbofan with Application to Noise PredictionThis work continues the analysis of data obtained during a 2017 NASA DGEN Aeropropulsion Research Turbofan (DART) core/combustor-noise baseline test in the NASA GRC Aero-Acoustic Propulsion Laboratory (AAPL). The DART is a cost-efficient testbed for the study of core-noise physics and mitigation. Acoustic data were simultaneously acquired using the AAPL overhead microphone array in the engine aft-quadrant farfield, a single midfield microphone, and two infinite-tube-probe sensors for unsteady pressures at the core-nozzle exit. The data are here examined on an 1/3-octave basis as a first step in extending and improving core-noise prediction capability.Document ID20190025443Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHultgren, Lennart S.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Boyle, Devin K.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Henderson, Brenda S.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredMay 31, 2019Publication DateMay 1, 2019Subject CategoryAcousticsAircraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM—2019-220212E-19700AIAA Paper 2019–2642GRC-E-DAA-TN68639Meeting InformationMeeting: AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics ConferenceLocation: DelftCountry: NetherlandsStart Date: May 20, 2019End Date: May 23, 2019Sponsors:Council of European Aerospace Societies,American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)Funding Number(s)WBS: 081876.02.03.50.03.06Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Technical ReviewSingle ExpertKeywordsCombustor NoiseAeroacousticsTurbomachinery NoiseAvailable DownloadsNameType20190025443.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7558 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the 

Chesapeake Bay Program, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 5, 2024 

Mr. WITTMAN (for himself, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, and Mr. SARBANES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the Chesapeake Bay Program, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Chesapeake Bay Pro5 gram Reauthorization Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM. 

7 Section 117(j) of the Federal Water Pollution Control 

8 Act (33 U.S.C. 1267(j)) is amended— 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7558 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

2 end; 

3 (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at 

4 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and; 

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

6 ‘‘(6) for each of fiscal years 2026 through 

7 2030, $100,000,000.’’. 

Æ 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7607 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7607

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at Block 1025, Lots 18 & 19, Northeast Corner of US Route 9 South and 
Main Street in the Township of Middle, County of Cape May, New Jersey, 
          as the ``George Henry White Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 8, 2024

  Mr. Van Drew (for himself, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Kean of New 
   Jersey, Mr. Norcross, Mr. Kim of New Jersey, Mr. Gottheimer, Mr. 
Pallone, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Payne, Ms. Sherrill, and Mrs. 
 Watson Coleman) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
             the Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at Block 1025, Lots 18 & 19, Northeast Corner of US Route 9 South and 
Main Street in the Township of Middle, County of Cape May, New Jersey, 
          as the ``George Henry White Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. GEORGE HENRY WHITE POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at Block 1025, Lots 18 & 19, Northeast Corner of US Route 9 
South and Main Street in the Township of Middle, County of Cape May, 
New Jersey, shall be known and designated as the ``George Henry White 
Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``George 
Henry White Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 556.222 Doramectin. ( a ) *Acceptable daily intake (ADI).* The ADI for total residue of doramectin is 0.75 μg/kg of body weight per day.
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for doramectin (marker residue) are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* ( i ) Liver (target tissue): 300 ppb.
( ii ) Muscle: 30 ppb.
( 2 ) *Swine.* Liver (target tissue): 160 ppb.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 522.770, 522.772, and 524.770 of this chapter.
[84 FR 32993, July 11, 2019, as amended at 88 FR 16549, Mar. 20, 2023]
§ 582.1125 Aluminum sulfate. ( a ) *Product.* Aluminum sulfate.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.