alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Summary of Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.24 
 Summary Of Director Compensation 
 We use a combination of cash and equity-based compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to
serve on the Company’s board of directors (“Board”). In setting director compensation, we consider the significant amount of time that directors expend in fulfilling their duties and comparative data regarding director compensation of
our peers. Neither Michael L. Scudder (our President and Chief Executive Officer) nor Thomas J. Schwartz (our Executive Vice President) receive compensation for serving as a member of the Board. 
 Cash Compensation. In 2008, the cash component of our director compensation program consisted of an annual fixed retainer of $40,000 for
each non-employee director plus additional annual retainers of: (1) $8,000 for the chair of the audit committee; (2) $4,000 for each audit committee member; (3) $4,000 for the chair of the Compensation Committee; and (4) $4,000
for the chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. As of September 14, 2008, we implemented an annual cash retainer for our non-employee Chair of the Board in the amount of $100,000. Each annual retainer was paid in equal
quarterly installments in arrears. Payment of each annual retainer was contingent upon the director’s service during the preceding quarter. We also reimburse our directors for any Board and committee attendance-related expenses. 
 Equity-Based Compensation. In 2008, the equity component of our director compensation program consisted of the issuance of both
nonqualified stock options in February of 2008 and shares of restricted common stock of the Company in May of 2008. For each director, the aggregate value of his or her grants of nonqualified stock options and restricted common stock was $56,000.
The number of shares granted under each award was equal to the average of the high and low sales price of common stock on the date of grant. These equity awards have a vesting period of one year from the date of grant, and are nontransferable except
to family members, family trusts or partnerships. 
 Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors. The First Midwest
Bancorp, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-employee Directors (Directors Deferred Plan) allows non-employee directors to defer receipt of either fifty or one hundred percent of any director fees and retainers. Deferral elections are made
in December of each year for amounts to be earned in the following year. Accounts are deemed to be invested in separate investment accounts under the plan, with the same investment alternatives as those available under the our Retirement Plan,
including an investment account deemed to be invested in shares of Company Common Stock.
# C_2006143EN.01000401.xml

| 17.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 May 2006 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union

(Case C-436/03) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Regulation (EC) No 1435/2003 - European Cooperative Society (SCE) - Choice of legal basis - Article 95 EC - Article 308 EC)

(2006/C 143/08)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: R. Passos, E. Waldherr and J. Rufas Quintana, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Jacqué and M.C. Giorgi Fort, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Schmidt and J.-F. Pasquier, Agents); Kingdom of Spain (represented by: E. Braquehais Conesa, Agent); United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: R. Caudwell, Agent, assisted by Lord Goldsmith and N. Paines)

Intervener:

Re:

Annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1435/2003 of 22 July 2003 on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society (SCE) (OJ 2003 L 207, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Parliament to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Parliament to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Commission of the European Communities to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Commission of the European Communities to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 289, 29.11.2003.

1

---
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

BENJAMIN LEE BLUNT, JR.,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D16-1006

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed July 29, 2016

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Lake County,

William G. Law, Jr, Judge.

Benjamin Lee Blunt, Jr., Orlando, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Benjamin Lee Blunt, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his motion for 

postconviction relief. Although unclear, it appears to us, as it did to the trial court, that the

motion was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the trial 

court's summary denial of the motion, but conclude that Blunt should have been given an 

opportunity to amend his facially defective motion if he can do so in good faith. See Fla. 

R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(1); Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754, 761-62 (Fla. 2007).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

LAWSON, C.J., ORFINGER and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
§ 417.458 Recoupment of uncollected deductible and coinsurance amounts. An HMO or CMP agrees not to recoup deductible and coinsurance amounts for which Medicare enrollees were liable in a previous contract period except in the following circumstances: ( a ) The HMO or CMP failed to collect the deductible and coinsurance amounts during the contract period in which they were due because of— ( 1 ) Underestimation of the actuarial value of the deductible and coinsurance amounts; or
( 2 ) A billing error.
( b ) The HMO or CMP has identified the amounts and obtained advance CMS approval of the recoupment and the method and timing of recoupment.
( c ) The HMO or CMP collects these amounts no later than the end of the contract period following the contract period during which they were found to be due.
[50 FR 1346, Jan. 10, 1985, as amended at 58 FR 38082, July 15, 1993; 60 FR 45678, Sept. 1, 1995]
#### ROLLINS COLLEGE, an Institution of learning, and Travelers Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Petitioners, v. CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK OF ORLANDO, as administrator of the Estate of Kerry Ann Cavanaugh, Deceased, et al., Respondents ROLLINS COLLEGE, an Institution of learning, and Travelers Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Petitioners, v. James R. CAVANAUGH, as natural father of Kerry Ann Cavanaugh, et al., Respondents.

No. 45871.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 5, 1974.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and BOYD, McCAIN, DEKLE and OVERTON, JJ., concur.
# C_2005330EN.01002201.xml

| 24.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 330/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 330/22

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 27 October 2005 — Eden v OHIM

(Case T-305/04) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Olfactory mark: Smell of ripe strawberries - Absolute ground for refusal - Sign not capable of being represented graphically - Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2005/C 330/54)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant(s): Eden SARL (Paris, France) (represented by M. Antoine-Lalance, avocat)

Applicant(s):

Defendant(s): Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Defendant(s):

Application for

annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 May 2004 (Case R 591/2003-1) concerning registration of the olfactory sign, Smell of ripe strawberries, as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the applicant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 262, 23.10.2004.

1

---
Editorial Note on Part 410
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 410 appear at 62 FR 46037, Aug. 29, 1997.

§ 410.110 Requirements for coverage of partial hospitalization services by CMHCs. Medicare part B covers partial hospitalization services furnished by or under arrangements made by a CMHC if they are provided by a CMHC as defined in § 410.2 that has in effect a provider agreement under part 489 of this chapter and if the services are— ( a ) Prescribed by a physician and furnished under the general supervision of a physician;
( b ) Subject to certification by a physician in accordance with § 424.24(e)(1) of this subchapter; and
( c ) Furnished under a plan of treatment that meets the requirements of § 424.24(e)(2) of this subchapter.
[59 FR 6577, Feb. 11, 1994]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0001023291
<NAME> TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       22,867
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      9,312
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                           4,587
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         2,748
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  39,514
<COMMON>                                         6,940
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              1,448
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   8,246
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,214
<PREFERRED>                                        190
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            15,133
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 896
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   2,055
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    1,071
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  10,709
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   39,514
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       14,736
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               526
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      12,273
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      12,273
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                          2,463
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                  45
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                   2,508
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         1,381
<NET-INCOME>                                       740
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      740
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                           573
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                          476
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                           2,005
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.79
        


</TABLE>
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAn analytical technique for approximating unsteady aerodynamics in the time domainAn analytical technique is presented for approximating unsteady aerodynamic forces in the time domain. The order of elements of a matrix Pade approximation was postulated, and the resulting polynomial coefficients were determined through a combination of least squares estimates for the numerator coefficients and a constrained gradient search for the denominator coefficients which insures stable approximating functions. The number of differential equations required to represent the aerodynamic forces to a given accuracy tends to be smaller than that employed in certain existing techniques where the denominator coefficients are chosen a priori. Results are shown for an aeroelastic, cantilevered, semispan wing which indicate a good fit to the aerodynamic forces for oscillatory motion can be achieved with a matrix Pade approximation having fourth order numerator and second order denominator polynomials.Document ID19810002914Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsDunn, H. J.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateNovember 1, 1980Subject CategoryStructural MechanicsReport/Patent NumberL-13255NASA-TP-1738Accession Number81N11422Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-34-33-02Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19810002914.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
#### Idania RIOS, Appellant, v. FLORIDA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 78-2268.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 5, 1979.

*701Stabinski, Funt, Levine & Vega and Regina G. Zelonker, Miami, for appellant.

Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Knight and Michael J. Murphy, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON and SCHWARTZ, JJ., and CHAPPELL, BILL G., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff-appellant sought to enforce an insurance policy which had been regularly cancelled for nonpayment of premium. A summary judgment was entered for the appellee insurer.

On this appeal, it is urged (1) that the cancellation was not effective and (2) that the producing agent of the assigned risk upon whose representations the plaintiff relied for reinstatement of the policy was the agent for the company. We affirm.

The plaintiff presents no genuine issue on the cancellation question. The un-controverted facts show an effective cancellation pursuant to Section 627.728, Florida Statutes (1977). It is established that a producing agent does not become the agent of the insurer solely by virtue of the operation of the assigned risk plan. See American Casualty Company of Reading, *Pennsylvania v. Castellanos,*203 So.2d 26 (Fla.3d DCA 1967). That case did hold that the insurance company had “clothed” the agent with “apparent authority” when it accepted the benefit of no less than five transactions with the policyholder subsequent to the original issuance of the policy. The present case is devoid of any action subsequent to the issuance of the policy that could be said to clothe the agent with apparent authority to bind the company to a representation of reinstatement.

Affirmed.
H. R. 3400

One Hundred Fourth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

An Act

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse to be constructed

at a site on 18th Street between Dodge and Douglas Streets in Omaha, Nebraska,

as the ‘‘Roman L. Hruska Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The Federal building and United States courthouse to be

constructed at a site on 18th Street between Dodge and Douglas

Streets in Omaha, Nebraska, shall be known and designated as

the ‘‘Roman L. Hruska Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the Federal building and

United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

to be a reference to the ‘‘Roman L. Hruska Federal Building and

United States Courthouse’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed May 23, 2019.

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 01148

- CV

AMVETS POST 22 AUXILIARY, Appellant

V. AMVETS DEP ARTMEN T OF TEXAS FOUNDATION , Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 18

- 04759

- E


### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Osborne, and Reichek Opinion by Justice Schenck This is an appeal from the trial court’s judgment finding appellant guilty of forcible

detainer. After a review of the clerk’s record revealed the judgment had been superseded during
the trial court’s plenary power by an order dismissing the case for want of jurisdiction, we
questioned our juri sdiction over the appeal as the appeal appeared to have become moot. See

Williams v. Lara , 52 S.W.3d 171, 184 (Tex. 2001) (case becomes moot if controversy ceases to
exist). We directed appellant to file a letter brief addressing our concern and cautione d appellant
that failure to comply could result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 42.3(a),(c). More than ten days have passed and appellant has not responded. Accordingly,
we dismiss the appeal. See id. 42.3(a),(c).

181148F.P05 /David J. Schenck/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE– 2

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

AMVETS POST 22 AUXILIARY, Appellant

No. 05

- 18

- 01148

- CV V.

AMVETS DEPARTMENT OF TEXAS FOUNDATION, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 18

- 04759

- E. Opinion delivered by Justice Schenck, Justices Osborne and Reichek participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

We ORDER appellee AMVETS Department of Texas Foundation recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant AMVETS Post 22 Auxiliary.

Judgment entered this 23rd day of May 2019.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Tongan Prime Minister Sovaleni

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Tongan Prime Minister Sovaleni							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

September 14, 2022

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy R. Sherman met with Tongan Prime Minister Siaosi Sovaleni yesterday in Honolulu, Hawaii. The Deputy Secretary and the Prime Minister discussed continued progress on the way ahead for establishing a new U.S. Embassy in Tonga.  They also talked about deepening U.S.-Tonga cooperation in areas such as law enforcement and reaffirmed the strong U.S.-Tonga partnership.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary TripDeputy Secretary of StateIndo-PacificLaw EnforcementOffice of the SpokespersonRegional IssuesTonga

Back to Top
# C_2006144EN.01001502.xml

| 20.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 144/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/15

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4106 — Isola/Polyclad)

(2006/C 144/11)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 12 April 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4106. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4106. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex)

---
§ 433.136 Definitions. For purposes of this subpart— *Private insurer* means: ( 1 ) Any commercial insurance company offering health or casualty insurance to individuals or groups (including both experience-rated insurance contracts and indemnity contracts);
( 2 ) Any profit or nonprofit prepaid plan offering either medical services or full or partial payment for services included in the State plan; and
( 3 ) Any organization administering health or casualty insurance plans for professional associations, unions, fraternal groups, employer-employee benefit plans, and any similar organization offering these payments or services, including self-insured and self-funded plans.
*Third party* means any individual, entity or program that is or may be liable to pay all or part of the expenditures for medical assistance furnished under a State plan.
*Title IV-D agency* means the organizational unit in the State that has the responsibility for administering or supervising the administration of a State plan for child support enforcement under title IV-D of the Act.
[49 FR 8984, Feb. 11, 1980, as amended at 50 FR 46664, Nov. 12, 1985; 50 FR 49389, Dec. 2, 1985]
Motion Denied, Appeal Dismissed, and Memorandum Opinion filed March 24, 

2020.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00831-CV

BRIDGET HUNTER, Appellant

V.

BEL MANDALAY LIMITED PARTNER D/B/A MANDALAY AT 

SHADOW LAKE, Appellee

On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 3

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1138391

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a final judgment signed October 17, 2019. Appellant’s 

brief was originally due January 21, 2020. No brief or motion to extend time to file 

the brief has been filed. 

On January 30, 2020, the court ordered appellant to file a brief by February 

28, 2020. We cautioned that if appellant failed to comply with our order, we would 
2

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). No brief or 

motion to extend time to file the brief was filed.

Therefore, the appeal is DISMISSED. Appellant’s “Emergency Motion to 

Request a Review of Excessive Supersedeas Bond and Legal Fees,” filed October 

29, 2019, was carried with the case and is now DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot, and Zimmerer.