alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3

COST PLUS, INC.

THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT SEVERANCE

AGREEMENT

This Third Amended and Restated Employment Severance Agreement (the Amendment) is made and entered into effective
June 24, 2010 (the Effective Date), by and between Jeffrey A. Turner (the Executive) and Cost Plus, Inc. (the Company).

WHEREAS, the Parties entered into a Seventh Amended and Restated Employment Severance Agreement (the Agreement) dated
April 1, 2009; and

WHEREAS, the Parties desire to amend certain provisions of the Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the Parties agree that the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

1. Term and Termination. Section 10 of the Agreement will be amended and restated as follows:

Term and Termination. This Agreement shall terminate on June 15, 2012; provided, however, in the event of a Change of
Control that occurs during the one (1) year period preceding June 15, 2012, the term of this Agreement will extend through the one (1)-year anniversary of such Change of Control. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Executive becomes
entitled to benefits pursuant to Section 3(a) or 3(b) of this Agreement, this Agreement will not terminate until, but will terminate at, such time that all of the obligations of the parties hereto with respect to this Agreement have been
satisfied.

2. Full Force and Effect. To the extent not expressly amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect.

3. Entire Agreement. This Amendment and the Agreement constitute the full and entire
understanding and agreement between the Parties with regard to the subjects hereof and thereof. This Amendment may be amended at any time only by mutual written agreement of the Parties.

4. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, all of which together shall constitute one instrument, and each
of which may be executed by less than all of the parties to this Amendment.

5. Governing Law. This Amendment will be
governed by the laws of the State of California (with the exception of its conflict of laws provisions).

[Signature page
follows]



---

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Amendment, in the case of
the Company by its duly authorized officer, as of the date set forth above.



|                                          |  |  |  |                      
|----------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------
|COST PLUS, INC.                           |  |  |  | EXECUTIVE            
|                                          |  | 
|/s/ Joan S. Fujii                         |  |  |  | /s/ Jeffrey A. Turner
|Signature                                 |  |  |  | Signature            
|                                          |  | 
|Joan S. Fujii                             |  |  |  | Jeffrey A. Turner    
|Print Name                                |  |  |  | Print Name           
|                                          |  | 
|Executive Vice President, Human Resources |  |  |  |                      
|Title                                     |  |  |  |                      



-2-
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129953(38) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, ANTHONY E. LAMAR, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 129953 

 COA: 262800 

Ingham CC: 04-000787-AA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s order of 

February 27, 2006 is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the 

order was entered erroneously. 

d0424 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

April 28, 2006 

Clerk
Exhibit 21.1



The following is a list of Avalons subsidiaries except for unnamed subsidiaries which considered in the aggregate as a single
subsidiary, would not constitute a significant subsidiary.



|                                                |  |                       
|----------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|Subsidiary Name                                 |  | State of Incorporation
|      American Landfill Management, Inc.       |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      American Waste Management Services, Inc. |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      Avalon Golf and Country Club, Inc.       |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      Avalon Lakes Golf, Inc.                  |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      Avalon Travel, Inc.                      |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      TGB, Inc.                                |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      DartAmericA, Inc.                        |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      Dart Trucking Company, Inc.              |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      Dart Realty, Inc.                        |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      Dart Services, Inc.                      |  | Ohio                  
|                                                | 
|      TRB National Systems, Inc.               |  | Ohio                  



Parent/subsidiary relationships are
indicated by indentations. In each case, 100% of the voting securities of each of the subsidiaries is owned by the indicated parent of such subsidiary.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       71130
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                               231611
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                   4334
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            307075
<PP&E>                                      116967
<DEPRECIATION>                               90186
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              338897
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        69127
<BONDS>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     25958
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                  535237
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                151172
<SALES>                                     639892
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            639892
<CGS>                                       295306
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               295306
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              3688
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  0
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         108592
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                107834
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0


</TABLE>
§ 121.407 Training program: Approval of flight simulation training devices. ( a ) Each FSTD used to satisfy a training requirement of this part in an approved training program, must meet all of the following requirements: ( 1 ) Be specifically approved by the Administrator for— ( i ) Use in the certificate holder's approved training program;
( ii ) The type airplane and, if applicable, the particular variation within type, for which the training or check is being conducted; and
( iii ) The particular maneuver, procedure, or flightcrew member function involved.
( 2 ) Maintain the performance, function, and other characteristics that are required for qualification in accordance with part 60 of this chapter or a previously qualified device, as permitted in accordance with § 60.17 of this chapter.
( 3 ) Be modified in accordance with part 60 of this chapter to conform with any modification to the airplane being simulated that results in changes to performance, function, or other characteristics required for qualification.
( 4 ) Be given a daily functional preflight check before being used.
( 5 ) Have a daily discrepancy log kept with each discrepancy entered in that log by the appropriate instructor, check pilot, or check flight engineer at the end of each training or check flight.
( b ) A particular FSTD may be approved for use by more than one certificate holder.
( c ) A Level B or higher FFS may be used instead of the airplane to satisfy the inflight requirements of §§ 121.439 and 121.441 and appendices E and F of this part, if the FFS— ( 1 ) Is approved under this section and meets the appropriate FFS requirements of appendix H of this part; and
( 2 ) Is used as part of an approved program that meets the training requirements of §§ 121.424 (a) and (c), 121.426, and appendix H of this part.
( d ) An FFS approved under this section must be used instead of the airplane to satisfy the pilot flight training requirements prescribed in the certificate holder's approved low-altitude windshear flight training program set forth in § 121.409(d) of this part.
( e ) An FFS approved under this section must be used instead of the airplane to satisfy the pilot flight training requirements prescribed in the extended envelope training set forth in § 121.423 of this part.
[Doc. No. 9509, 35 FR 90, Jan. 3, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 121-161, 45 FR 44183, June 30, 1980; Amdt. 121-199, 53 FR 37696, Sept. 27, 1988; Amdt. 121-366, 78 FR 67836, Nov. 12, 2013; Amdt. 121-382, 85 FR 10921, Feb. 25, 2020; Docket No. FAA-2019-0360; Amdt. No. 121-392, 89 FR 51425, June 18, 2024]
# Gazzetta ufficiale C 68A/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2466
  doi:10.3000/17252466.CA2011.068.ita |
| --- | --- |
| Gazzetta ufficiale
  dell'Unione europea | C 68A |
| | |
| Edizione in lingua italiana | Comunicazioni e informazioni | 54o anno3 marzo 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2466

doi:10.3000/17252466.CA2011.068.ita

Gazzetta ufficiale

dell'Unione europea

C 68A

Edizione in lingua italiana

Comunicazioni e informazioni

54o anno3 marzo 2011

---

| Numero d'informazione | Sommario | pagina |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Rettifiche |
| 2011/C 068A/01 | Rettifica del bando di concorso generale EPSO/AST/112/10 — Assistenti (AST 3) (GU C 341 A del 16.12.2010) | 1 |

Numero d'informazione

Sommario

pagina

Rettifiche

2011/C 068A/01

Rettifica del bando di concorso generale EPSO/AST/112/10 — Assistenti (AST 3) (GU C 341 A del 16.12.2010)

(GU C 341 A del 16.12.2010)

1

CRONISTORIA DELLE GU C A CONCORSI

Si riporta qui di seguito l'elenco delle GU C A pubblicate nell'anno in corso.

Salvo indicazione contraria, le GU sono pubblicate in tutte le versioni linguistiche.

| 19 | (PL) |
| --- | --- |
| 24 | |
| 35 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 37 | (PL/RO) |
| 60 | |
| 68 | |

19

(PL)

24

35

(DE/EN/FR)

37

(PL/RO)

60

68

| IT | |
| --- | --- |

IT

---

Rettifiche

| 3.3.2011 | IT | Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea | CA 68/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2011

IT

Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea

CA 68/1

---

Rettifica del bando di concorso generale EPSO/AST/112/10 — Assistenti (AST 3)

(

  Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea C 341 A del 16 dicembre 2010
  )

(2011/C 68 A/01)

A pagina 3, al titolo IV.2:

anziché:

| «Test d) | capacità professionali:


  esattezza e precisione | punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti


  punteggio minimo richiesto: 10 punti |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Test e) | capacità professionali:


  definizione delle priorità e organizzazione | punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti


  punteggio minimo: 10 punti» |

«Test d)

capacità professionali:

esattezza e precisione

punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti

punteggio minimo richiesto: 10 punti

Test e)

capacità professionali:

definizione delle priorità e organizzazione

punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti

punteggio minimo: 10 punti»

leggi:

| «Test d) | capacità professionali:


  esattezza e precisione | punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Test e) | capacità professionali:


  definizione delle priorità e organizzazione | punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti |
| | Il punteggio minimo richiesto complessivamente per i test d) e e) è 20 punti.» |

«Test d)

capacità professionali:

esattezza e precisione

punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti

Test e)

capacità professionali:

definizione delle priorità e organizzazione

punteggio: da 0 a 20 punti

Il punteggio minimo richiesto complessivamente per i test d) e e) è 20 punti.»

---
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 15

- 00239

- CR

Harold Schatz

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From County Criminal Court No. 10

of Tarrant County (G850948

- A2584679)

August 13, 2015

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(p)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for

want of jurisdiction

.

SECOND D ISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
```

[114th Congress Public Law 107]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 129 STAT. 2223]]

Public Law 114-107
114th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To exempt for an additional 4-year period, from the application of the 
 means-test presumption of abuse under chapter 7, qualifying members of 
reserve components of the Armed Forces and members of the National Guard 
who, after September 11, 2001, are called to active duty or to perform a 
 homeland defense activity for not less than 90 days. <<NOTE: Dec. 18, 
                         2015 -  [H.R. 4246]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: National Guard 
and Reservist Debt Relief Extension Act of 2015. 11 USC 101 note.>> 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Guard and Reservist Debt 
Relief Extension Act of 2015''.
SEC. 2. NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVISTS DEBT RELIEF AMENDMENT.

    Section 4(b) of the National Guard and Reservists Debt Relief Act of 
2008 (Public Law 110-438; 122 Stat. 5000) <<NOTE: 11 USC 707 note. 122 
Stat. 5002.>> is amended by striking ``7-year'' and inserting ``11-
year''.

    Approved December 18, 2015.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4246:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015):
            Dec. 16, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 17, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Exhibit (10) (iii) 32


                             AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE
                                     TO THE
                    CENTRAL HUDSON GAS & ELECTRIC CORPORATION
                             SAVINGS INCENTIVE PLAN


      BY THIS AMENDMENT, the Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation Savings
Incentive Plan (herein referred to as the "Plan") is hereby amended as follows,
effective January 1, 2001;

Section 3.1 is amended to read as follows:

      "3.1  CONDITIONS OF ELIGIBILITY

      Any Eligible Employee may participate in the Plan on the date of
employment with the Employer. The Employer shall give each new employee written
notice of eligibility to participate in the Plan."


      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed this 19th day of
September 2000.

      Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of:



                                     Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation

                                     By:  /s/ CARL E. MEYER
                                          -------------------------------------
                                           EMPLOYER


                                     Central Hudson Enterprises Corporation

                                     By:  /s/ ALLAN R. PAGE
                                          -------------------------------------
                                           EMPLOYER
#### § 13.216 Waivers.

Waivers of any rights provided by statute or regulation must be in writing or by stipulation made at a hearing and entered into the record. The parties must set forth the precise terms of the waiver and any conditions.
Opinion issued January 12 , 202 3

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 22
- 00 8 71
- CV

——————————— IN RE RECORD SOLUTIONS, LLC , DEPO HOLDINGS, LLC , AND

CHRONICLE BIDCO INC., Relator s

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator s , Record Solutions, LLC, Depo Holdings , LLC, and Chronicle Bidco
Inc. , ha ve filed a petition for writ of mandamus, challenging the trial court’s ruling

on a motion to compel

. 1

1 The underlying case is Record Solutions, LLC, Depo Holdings, LLC and Chronicle Bidco Inc. v. Merten Rice, Drew Murr, Tyler Stillwell, Monique Connor, and Banjaxed Solutions, LLC , C ause No. 2021

- 02370, pending in the 215th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Elaine Palmer presiding.2

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 52.8(a). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justi ce Adams and Justices Countiss and Rivas

- Molloy

.
Letter of Preferability



Exhibit 10.3 
 
May 7, 2003 
 
The Pantry, Inc. 
1801 Douglas Drive 
Sanford, North Carolina 27331 
 
Dear Sirs/Madams: 
 
At your request, we have read the description included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 27, 2003, of the facts relating to the change in the date of the
annual impairment test under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. We believe, on the basis of the facts so set forth and other information furnished to us by appropriate officials of the
Company, that the accounting change described in your Form 10-Q is to an alternative accounting principle that is preferable under the circumstances. 
 
We have not audited any consolidated financial statements of The Pantry, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any period
subsequent to September 26, 2002. Therefore, we are unable to express, and we do not express, an opinion on the facts set forth in the above-mentioned Form 10-Q, on the related information furnished to us by officials of the Company, or on the
financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of The Pantry, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any period subsequent to September 26, 2002. 
 
Yours truly, 
 

	
	 /s/    DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP      


	 Deloitte & Touche LLP
§ 27.1043 Cooling tests. ( a ) *General.* For the tests prescribed in § 27.1041(b), the following apply: ( 1 ) If the tests are conducted under conditions deviating from the maximum ambient atmospheric temperature specified in paragraph (b) of this section, the recorded powerplant temperatures must be corrected under paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section unless a more rational correction method is applicable.
( 2 ) No corrected temperature determined under paragraph (a)(1) of this section may exceed established limits.
( 3 ) For reciprocating engines, the fuel used during the cooling tests must be of the minimum grade approved for the engines, and the mixture settings must be those normally used in the flight stages for which the cooling tests are conducted.
( 4 ) The test procedures must be as prescribed in § 27.1045.
( b ) *Maximum ambient atmospheric temperature.* A maximum ambient atmospheric temperature corresponding to sea level conditions of at least 100 degrees F. must be established. The assumed temperature lapse rate is 3.6 degrees F. per thousand feet of altitude above sea level until a temperature of −69.7 degrees F. is reached, above which altitude the temperature is considered constant at −69.7 degrees F. However, for winterization installations, the applicant may select a maximum ambient atmospheric temperature corresponding to sea level conditions of less than 100 degrees F.
( c ) *Correction factor (except cylinder barrels).* Unless a more rational correction applies, temperatures of engine fluids and power-plant components (except cylinder barrels) for which temperature limits are established, must be corrected by adding to them the difference between the maximum ambient atmospheric temperature and the temperature of the ambient air at the time of the first occurrence of the maximum component or fluid temperature recorded during the cooling test.
( d ) *Correction factor for cylinder barrel temperatures.* Cylinder barrel temperatures must be corrected by adding to them 0.7 times the difference between the maximum ambient atmospheric temperature and the temperature of the ambient air at the time of the first occurrence of the maximum cylinder barrel temperature recorded during the cooling test.
(Secs. 313(a), 601, 603, 604, and 605 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1354(a), 1421, 1423, 1424, and 1425); and sec. 6(c) of the Dept. of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1655(c)))
[Doc. No. 5074, 29 FR 15695, Nov. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 27-11, 41 FR 55470, Dec. 20, 1976; Amdt. 27-14, 43 FR 2325, Jan. 16, 1978]
#### WILLIAM B. HOWARD, JR., v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 41822.

Decided June 5, 1933]

*Mr. John W. Gashms*for the plaintiff. *King de King*were on the brief.

*Mr. Louis R.*Mehlinger, with whom was *Mr. W. W.*Scott, for the defendant.

*267MEMORANDUM BT THE COURT

The plaintiff, a lieutenant of the junior grade in the United States Navy, received the pay and allowances of an officer without dependents for the periods October 1,1928, to June 15, 1929, from September 15, 1929, to June 30, 1930, and from November 20, 1931, to August 5, 1932, the date of *268his marriage. His claim is for the increased rental allowances for the periods stated, provided by section 4 of the act . of June 10, 1922, 42 Stat. 625, 627, for an officer with a dependent mother.

The facts disclosed by the findings do not establish the-claim that plaintiff’s mother, during the periods in question, was in fact dependent on him for her chief support within-the requirements of the statute. *Odlin*v. *United*States, 74 C.Cls. 633; *Griffin*v. *United*States, 74 C.Cls. 292; *Rieger*v. *United*States, 69 C.Cls. 632.

It is ordered that the petition be dismissed.