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

# Romania

148 items

        -    TIAS  		Romania (07-209) – Additional Protocol to the Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment	  February 9, 2007 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (06-721) – Agreement Regarding the Activities of United States Forces Located on the Territory of Romania	  July 21, 2006 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (04-1018) – Agreement for the Promotion of Aviation Safety	  October 18, 2004 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (04-0719) – Agreement Concerning Cooperating in the Area of Countering the Proliferation on Nuclear Materials and Technologies	  July 19, 2004 
        -    TIAS  		Multilateral (04-227.4) – Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession on Romania	  February 27, 2004 
        -    		Romania (03-925) – Agreement Regarding Measures for the Protection of Classified Military Information	  September 25, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (03-708.1) – Agreement Concerning Cooperation in the Area of Counterproliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Promotion of Defense and Military Relations, with Amendments and Extensions	  July 8, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (13170) – Agreement Regarding the Status of United States Forces in Romania	  June 10, 2002 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (02-314) – Agreement concerning Educational and Scholarly Exchanges	  March 14, 2002 
        -    TIAS  		Romania (13037) – Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters	  October 17, 2001 

previous page1…12131415next page

Back to Top
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2937 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2937

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  For the reimbursement of attorney fees and costs incurred by former 
    employees of the White House Travel Office with respect to the 
    termination of their employment in that Office on May 19, 1993.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2937

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  For the reimbursement of attorney fees and costs incurred by former 
    employees of the White House Travel Office with respect to the 
    termination of their employment in that Office on May 19, 1993.

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

SECTION 1. REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, from 
amounts in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as are 
necessary to reimburse former employees of the White House Travel 
Office whose employment in that Office was terminated on May 19, 1993, 
for any attorney fees and costs they incurred with respect to that 
termination.
    (b) Verification Required.--The Secretary shall pay an individual 
in full under subsection (a) upon submission by the individual of 
documentation verifying the attorney fees and costs.
    (c) No Inference of Liability.--Liability of the United States 
shall not be inferred from enactment of or payment under this section.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON FILING OF CLAIMS.

    The Secretary of the Treasury shall not pay any claim filed under 
this Act that is filed later than 120 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3. REDUCTION.

    The amount paid pursuant to this Act to an individual for attorney 
fees and costs described in section 1 shall be reduced by any amount 
received before the date of the enactment of this Act, without 
obligation for repayment by the individual, for payment of such 
attorney fees and costs (including any amount received from the funds 
appropriated for the individual in the matter relating to the ``Office 
of the General Counsel'' under the heading ``Office of the Secretary'' 
in title I of the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 1994).

SEC. 4. PAYMENT IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

    Payment under this Act, when accepted by an individual described in 
section 1, shall be in full satisfaction of all claims of, or on behalf 
of, the individual against the United States that arose out of the 
termination of the White House Travel Office employment of that 
individual on May 19, 1993.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 19, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2924 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 2924

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 1, 1996

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To guarantee the timely payment of social security benefits in March 
                                 1996.

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

SECTION 1. TIMELY PAYMENT OF MARCH 1996 SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS 
              GUARANTEED.

    (a) Findings.--
            (1) Congress intends to pass an increase in the public debt 
        limit before March 1, 1996.
            (2) In the interim, social security beneficiaries should be 
        assured that social security benefits will be paid on a timely 
        basis in March 1996.
    (b) Guarantee of Social Security Benefit Payments.--In addition to 
any other authority provided by law, the Secretary of the Treasury may 
issue under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, obligations of 
the United States before March 1, 1996, in an amount equal to the 
monthly insurance benefits payable under title II of the Social 
Security Act in March 1996.
    (c) Obligations Exempt From Public Debt Limit.--
            (1) In general.--Obligations issued under subsection (b) 
        shall not be taken into account in applying the limitation in 
        section 3101(b) of title 31, United States Code.
            (2) Termination of exemption--Paragraph (1) shall cease to 
        apply on the earlier of--
                    (A) the date of the enactment of the first increase 
                in the limitation in section 3101(b) of title 31, 
                United States Code, after the date of the enactment of 
                this Act, or
                    (B) March 15, 1996.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 1, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           3,412
<SECURITIES>                                       388
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,326
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     16,765
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,611
<PP&E>                                          33,326
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,576
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,146
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,337
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,465
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,146
<SALES>                                         32,530
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,530
<CGS>                                           18,460
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,944
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    94
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,492
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,551
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,072
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .30
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM STERLING GAS
DRILLING FUND 1982 FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                              34
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    34
<PP&E>                                      12,426,338
<DEPRECIATION>                            (11,671,934)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 754,438
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          373,007
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     381,431<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   754,438
<SALES>                                        283,909
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               283,909
<CGS>                                          258,581
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  258,581
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,327
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.06<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>OTHER-SE is composed of partnership equity.
<F2>EPS - Primary is based upon limited partners shares of net income divided by
the outstanding partnership units of 14,370.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Douglas Laverne ADAMS, Apellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. MM-252.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 10, 1979.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Carl S. McGinnes, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Richard W. Prospect, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

*639PER CURIAM.

Adams appeals his conviction for possession of marijuana entered pursuant to a plea of nolo contendere reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. Adams alleges the marijuana was seized illegally because there was no probable cause to support the warrantless arrest. We affirm.

Officer Durden, while conducting a premise check at Champ’s pool hall at about 1:50 a. m., observed half of a plastic baggie containing a number of small hand-rolled cigarettes protruding from appellant’s sweater pouch. Durden promptly arrested appellant and retrieved the cigarettes while taking Adams to the patrol car. The officer testified that the area was a high crime area; it was uncommon to find hand-rolled cigarettes not to be marijuana in that area; it was common to find marijuana cigarettes carried in baggies; and that from his experience, the cigarettes looked like marijuana cigarettes because of the way they were rolled. Durden had been patrolling the area for three years and had made from 50 to 100 narcotic arrests.

Appellant urges reversal on the authority of *Carr v. State,*353 So.2d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). In *Carr,*the court found an illegal seizure of marijuana cigarettes where the officer stated “he ‘knew’ they were marijuana cigarettes *because*they were unevenly rolled and twisted at the end.” The court held the search and seizure was not incident to a lawful arrest because the hard facts of the case did not meet the standard enunciated below:

> “The test to determine probable cause is whether the facts and circumstances within the officer’s knowledge, and of which he had reasonably trustworthy information, are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been committed.”

Although we agree with the foregoing principle, we decline to follow *Carr*in finding that the facts here, as there, do not meet this standard. We think the hard facts as testified to by Officer Durden gave him probable cause to believe that an offense was being committed in his presence. Under the facts and circumstances presented to him here, the officer did not have to actually see the marijuana before forming the reasonable belief that appellant was in possession of marijuana. AFFIRMED.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and BOOTH and LARRY G. SMITH, JJ., concur.
§ 408.10 Claim for monthly benefits pending concurrently with request for SMI enrollment. ( a ) If it is clear that an individual who applies for social security or railroad retirement benefits and for SMI will be entitled to monthly benefits, the application for monthly benefits is processed simultaneously with the request for SMI enrollment. ( 1 ) If monthly benefits are paid, the SMI premiums are deducted from those benefits.
( 2 ) If monthly benefits are suspended (for instance, because the individual's earnings exceed the maximum allowed by law), the enrollee is billed for direct remittance.
( b ) If it is clear that an individual will be entitled to SMI, but there is substantial question as to eligibility for monthly benefits, the request for SMI enrollment is processed separately. ( 1 ) When SMI enrollment is approved, the enrollee is billed for direct remittance.
( 2 ) When the application for monthly benefits is adjudicated, the following rules apply: ( i ) If monthly benefits are paid, the SMI premiums are deducted from those benefits, with appropriate adjustments for any premiums already paid by direct remittance.
( ii ) If the application for monthly benefits is approved but the benefits are suspended, the grace period is as set forth in § 408.8(a).
( iii ) If the application for monthly benefits is denied, the grace period is as set forth in § 408.8(a)(1).
[52 FR 48115, Dec. 18, 1987, as amended at 56 FR 48112, Sept. 24, 1991]
#### § 136a.1 Purpose of the regulations.

These regulations establish general principles and program requirements for carrying out the Indian health program.

[46 FR 40692, Aug. 11, 1981. Redesignated at 52 FR 35048, Sept. 16, 1987]
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-59376 on Form S-3and Nos. 33-41453, 33-48646, 33-77080, 333-31753, 333-59547, 333-80071, 333-36836, 333-62574,333-92368, 333-107875, 333-125392, and 333-144768 on Form S-8 of our report dated February 6, 2008,relating to the financial statements of Somanetics Corporation, and the effectiveness of SomaneticsCorporation’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form10-K of Somanetics Corporation for the year ended November 30, 2007./s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLPDetroit, Michigan
#### Albert Kraetzer, Respondent, *v.*Emil Thomas et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term,

April, 1898.)

1. City Court of Hew York — Conduct of defendants which admits that there are questions for the jury.

Where the defendants do not move to dismiss, nor ask for the direction of a verdict, or except to the charge made, or request that any charge be made, there is an unequivocal concession that there are questions of fact for the jury.

2. Same —■ What orders relative to new trial's are appealable to the Appellate Term.

An order of the City Court of New York denying a motion for a new trial, when affirmed by its General Term, is not further appeal-able. Only orders granting new trials and questions of law, which are raised by proper exceptions, are reviewable by the Appellate Term.

Kraetzer v. Thomas, 22 Misc. Rep. 557, affirmed.

Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of the City of Hew York, affirming a judgment rendered upon the verdict of a jury in favor of the respondent.

John L. Branch, for appellants.

John Hill Morgan, for respondent.

*330Beekman, P. J.

At the close"of the respondent’s case, the. attorney for the appellants moved to dismiss on the ground of the insufficiency of the respondent’s proofs. The motion was denied and an exception was taken to. the ruling of the. court. There, was no renewal of the motion, however, at the close of the appellants’ case, nor was the direction of a verdict asked for, but the case was submitted by the court to the jury without any question being ■ made as to the propriety of this course. ¡No exceptions were taken to the charge of the trial justice, nor were any requests to charge submitted to him by the attorney for the appellants. There was, therefore, ari unequivocal concession on his part that there were questions of fact'in the case Which should be passed upon by the jury, and that there was some evidence tending to support the respondent’s cause of action.

The exception taken to the denial of the motion to> set! aside the verdict and for a new trial, made upon the minutes of the judge after the verdict had been rendered, raises no question for review here. An exception is not proper in such a tease, but an. order expressing the determination of the court upon the motion must be made and entered. This, it is true, was done here, but as an order denying a motion for a new trial is not appealable to this court, the affirmance by 'the General Term below of the order in question was. final. Upon appeals to this court'from the City Court after a trial has been had, only orders granting new trials and questions of law raised by proper exceptions in the course of the trial can be considered. As there are no exceptions presenting any grounds for reversal, it follows that the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

Gildeesleeve and Giegerich, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
rdvt-ex1016_18.htm



Exhibit 10.16

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

This First Amendment to Employment Agreement (the "Amendment") is made as of November 9, 2020 (the “First Amendment Effective Date”) by and between Red Violet, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), and James Reilly (the "Executive"). Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Employment Agreement (defined below).

 

WHEREAS, the Company and Executive entered into that certain Employment Agreement made by and between the Company and Executive, dated March 26, 2018 (the "Employment Agreement"); and

 

WHEREAS, Company and Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement in accordance with the terms and provisions hereof.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and Executive hereby adopt this Amendment effective as of the First Amendment Effective Date and agree as follows:

 


	
 
	
1.
	
Paragraph 6 to Exhibit A to the Employment Agreement ("Exhibit A") is deleted in its entirety and the following substituted in lieu thereof:




 

6. Term: Commencing on the Effective Date and ending March 26, 2024 (the “Term Expiration Date”); provided, that, upon the Term Expiration Date this Agreement shall automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms, unless either party provides written notice to the other no less than one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the commencement of each such renewal term setting forth a desire to terminate this Agreement at the expiration of the then current term. Termination of this Agreement will not affect the rights or obligations of the parties hereunder arising out of, or relating to, circumstances occurring prior to the expiration of this Agreement, which rights and obligations will survive the termination of this Agreement and the termination of the Executive’s employment with the Company.


	
 
	
2.
	
Except as expressly amended herein, all terms and provisions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




 

[Signature Page Follows]






 

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

 

COMPANY:

 

Red Violet, Inc., a Delaware corporation

 

By: /s/ Derek Dubner

       Derek Dubner, CEO

 

EXECUTIVE:

 

/s/ James Reilly

James Reilly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Signature Page to First Amendment to Employment Agreement]