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

No. 81-230

#### The State of New Hampshire v. Raoul St. Laurent

June 11, 1982

*Gregory H. Smith,*attorney general *(Michael A. Pignatelli,*assistant attorney general, on the brief and orally), for the State.

*Howard and Gleason,*of Henniker *(James D. Gleason*on the brief and orally), for the defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

Defendant appeals from a jury verdict finding him guilty of falsifying physical evidence. RSA 641:6. Defendant allegedly hid a forty-foot flatbed trailer to hinder an investigation being conducted by the State police. He asserts that the Superior Court *(Souter,*J.) erred in failing to suppress evidence obtained as the result of an allegedly unreasonable search and seizure and that the State’s evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.

In October 1980, a State trooper stopped a tractor trailer unit in Connecticut, and the driver identified the defendant as the owner. The license plate, “RAOUL 1”, was assigned to defendant’s trucking company. The trooper impounded the trailer after he determined it had been stolen. It then disappeared from police custody. *541A New Hampshire State trooper determined that defendant had two trailers with identical vehicle identification numbers registered to his business, so he decided to visit the defendant. After obtaining a search warrant, the trooper found three trailers on defendant’s property, and one had a secret identification number matching that of a trailer stolen from New Jersey in 1976. The defendant agreed not to remove the “hot” trailer; however, when the police returned the next day pursuant to their agreement with the defendant, the trailer had “disappeared.”

The evidence need not be chronicled here, but we conclude that it, as well as all reasonable inferences, meets the standard of *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); *see State v. Glidden,*122 N.H. 41, 49, 441 A.2d 728, 733 (1982). Although the defendant asserts that the warrant and affidavit were deficient, we find no error. *See State v. Breest,*116 N.H. 734, 743-44, 367 A.2d 1320, 1328 (1976); *State v. Salsman,*112 N.H. 138, 140-42, 290 A.2d 618, 619-21 (1972).

*Affirmed.*
Standard Retainer / Meeting Fee Arrangement for Non-Employee Directors



 Exhibit 10.21 
 Standard Retainer/Meeting Fee Arrangement for Non-Employee Directors 
 Effective October 19, 2006, Owens
Corning’s Compensation Committee amended the standard retainer/meeting fee arrangement for non-employee directors to provide as follows: 
  

	 	-	Non-employee directors receive an annual board retainer of $125,000. Effective January 1, 2007, the annual board retainer will be provided in the form of 50% cash and 50% in
restricted shares of Owens Corning common stock valued as of the first trading day of the year. 

  

	 	-	The Chair of the Audit Committee receives an additional annual retainer of $15,000, and the Chairs of all other board committees receive an additional annual retainer of $10,000.


  

	 	-	Directors receive meeting fees of $1,500 per meeting for attendance at each Board meeting, at each Committee meeting of which the director is a member, and at each other function
which the director is requested by Owens Corning to attend. 

  

	 	-	Each new director is eligible for a grant of 6,000 restricted shares of Owens Corning common stock upon initial election or appointment to the Board. 

 For periods prior to October 19, 2006, director compensation provided for an annual board retainer of $100,000, an annual retainer of $7,500 for Committee Chairs,
and meeting fees of $1,500 per meeting for attendance at each Committee meeting of which the director was a member and at each other function which the director was requested by Owens Corning to attend.
###### Editorial Note on Part 74

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

#### § 74.605 Registration of stationary television pickup receive sites.

Licensees of TV pickup stations in the 6875-7125 MHz and 12700-13200 MHz bands shall register their stationary receive sites using the Commission's Universal Licensing System.

[76 FR 59571, Sept. 27, 2011]
Exhibit 10.10


Axcelis
Technologies, Inc.

Named Executive Officer Base Compensation at March 1, 2007


This Exhibit discloses
the current understandings with respect to base compensation between Axcelis
Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) and each of:


·       the Company’s principal
executive officer (Mary G. Puma),


·       the Company’s principal
financial officer (Stephen G. Bassett), and


·       the three most highly
compensated other executive officers serving as executive officers at December 31,
2006.


These executive officers are referred to herein as “named
executive officers” or “NEOs.”


Other than in the
case of Mary G. Puma, has not entered into any written agreements with its
named executive officers addressing the amount of base salary due to the
executive. The Company’s Employment Agreement with Ms. Puma is listed as Exhibit 10.12
to this Form 10-K (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to
the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-36330)).
The Company maintains that all executive officers, other than Ms. Puma,
are employees at will and that the Company has no obligation to pay base
salary, other than amounts accrued for services rendered prior to termination
of employment and other than in circumstances where the Change of Control
Agreements described in our Proxy Statement and filed as an Exhibit to
this Form 10-K are applicable.


In the
course of the employment relationship with each NEO, the Company communicates
to the named executive officer the amount of base salary approved by the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors, which compensation is subject to change in
the discretion of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. The
following table sets forth the annual base salary as communicated to the named
executive officers of the Company as in effect on March 1, 2007:




	
  Named Executive Officer

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title

  	
   

  	
  Base Salary

  
	
  Mary G. Puma

  	
   

  	
  President and Chief
  Executive Officer

  	
   

  	
  $500,000

  
	
  Stephen G. Bassett

  	
   

  	
  Executive VP and Chief
  Financial Officer

  	
   

  	
  $276,000

  
	
  Matthew Flynn

  	
   

  	
  Senior VP, Global
  Customer Operations

  	
   

  	
  $315,000

  
	
  Lynnette C. Fallon

  	
   

  	
  Executive VP HR/Legal
  and General Counsel

  	
   

  	
  $305,000

  
	
  Kevin Brewer

  	
   

  	
  Senior VP, Manufacturing Operations

  	
   

  	
  $250,000
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Interactive Intelligence, Inc. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen R. Head, Chief Financial Officer, Vice President of Finance and Administration, Secretary and Treasurer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
The Report, to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2, fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.








/s/ Stephen R. Head


Stephen R. Head


Chief Financial Officer, Vice President of Finance and Administration,


Secretary and Treasurer


(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)


November 9, 2010
[Cite as State v. Murphy, 127 Ohio St.3d 120, 2010-Ohio-5271.] 

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. MURPHY, APPELLANT. 

[Cite as State v. Murphy, 127 Ohio St.3d 120, 2010-Ohio-5271.] 

Cause remanded to the court of appeals for application of State v. Rohrbaugh. 

(No. 2009-1309 — Submitted August 10, 2010 — Decided November 2, 2010.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Muskingum County, No. CT2008-0067, 

2009-Ohio-2690. 

__________________ 

{¶ 1} The cause is remanded to the court of appeals for application of 

our decision in State v. Rohrbaugh, 126 Ohio St.3d 421, 2010-Ohio-3286, 934 

N.E.2d 920, including a determination of whether the three conditions set forth in 

the syllabus of State v. Rohrbaugh were present with regard to appellant’s guilty 

plea to the amended indictment. 

 BROWN, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR,

O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 

__________________ 

David A. Sams, for appellant. 

______________________
No. 10-11280.

#### Gore *v.*Tucker, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
#### § 90.231 Scope.

This subpart sets forth requirements and standards for licensing and operation of non-voice and other specialized radio uses (other than radiolocation). Such uses include secondary signaling, telemetry, radioteleprinter, radiofacsimile, automatic vehicle monitoring (AVM), radio call box, relay, vehicular repeater, and control station operations.
#### § 30.3 Eligibility.

Any entity who meets the technical, financial, character, and citizenship qualifications that the Commission may require in accordance with such Act, other than those precluded by section 310 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 310, is eligible to hold a license under this part.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.15

                             SUMMARY OF KEY TERMS OF
                NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS

      Corillian's CEO and four most highly compensated executive officers (the
"named executive officers") are generally compensated pursuant to oral, informal
compensation arrangements. Material elements of Corillian's compensation
arrangements with its named executive officers consist of a base salary,
participation in an incentive cash bonus program and equity compensation awards.

      The following table sets forth the current base salaries for Corillian's
named executive officers.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
EXECUTIVE OFFICER                             CURRENT SALARY
-----------------                             --------------
<S>                                           <C>
Alex P. Hart                                  $      280,000
Paul K. Wilde                                 $      200,000
Christopher L. Brooks                         $      200,000
Erich J. Litch                                $      190,000
Brian Kissel                                  $      199,992
</TABLE>

      Named executive officers are also eligible to receive discretionary
bonuses on a semi-annual basis. The following table sets forth the target bonus
amounts for 2006 for the named executive officers as a percentage of base
salary.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              2006 BONUS
EXECUTIVE OFFICER                               TARGET
-----------------                             ----------
<S>                                           <C>
Erich J. Litch                                    105%
Brian Kissel                                       35%
Alex P. Hart                                       60%
Christopher L. Brooks                              35%
Paul K. Wilde                                      35%
</TABLE>

Corillian's named executive officers are eligible to receive awards under
Corillian's equity compensation plans. All option grants to executive officers
are approved by the Compensation Committee. Guidelines for the number of options
granted to named executive officers have been established, and are reviewed
periodically, by the Compensation Committee to ensure competitiveness. The
Compensation Committee determines the terms of actual grants based on individual
performance and contribution to our strategic success. Options granted to
Corillian's named executive officers generally have a term of ten years.

Corillian has entered into severance agreements with its named executive
officers pursuant to which they will receive certain severance benefits if their
employment with Corillian terminates under certain circumstances, including if
their employment terminates in certain circumstances within one year following a
change in control of Corillian.

Occasionally, Corillian reimburses newly hired executives for relocation
expenses. Named executive officers also participate in Corillian's other
employee benefit plans on the same basis as other employees.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF GLODE HOLDINGS, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1998 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998            JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998            DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          1,439                  3,564
<SECURITIES>                                        0                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  25,246                 40,618
<ALLOWANCES>                                    2,736                  3,482
<INVENTORY>                                    18,380                 17,791
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               51,181                 61,045
<PP&E>                                        157,436                168,610
<DEPRECIATION>                                 74,107                 83,836
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                147,036                156,345
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          30,095                335,904
<BONDS>                                       304,007                318,271
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0                      0
<PREFERRED>                                         0                      0
<COMMON>                                           22                     22
<OTHER-SE>                                  (179,844)              (186,255)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  147,036                156,345
<SALES>                                       171,093                173,933
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              171,093                173,933
<CGS>                                         111,609                116,111
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 139,528                145,737
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                6,029                  (765)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             14,154                 32,179
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                11,382                (3,218)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    3,956                  3,193
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   187                      0
<CHANGES>                                           0                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                    7,239                (6,411)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         0                      0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0                      0


</TABLE>
No. 11-5870.

#### Garcia Casares *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 10-1500.

#### Mylan Laboratories, Inc., et al. *v.*Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts et al.

C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
EXHIBIT 32

             CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                   AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of DataLogic
International, Inc (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30,
2004 (the "Report"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity
as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
respectively, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
       15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.     The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
       material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
       the Company.

Dated:  August 17, 2004                      By: /s/ Derek Nguyen
                                                ------------------------------
                                                 Derek Nguyen
                                                 CEO
                                                 (Principal Executive Officer)

Dated:  August 17, 2004                      By: /s/ Khanh Nguyen
                                                ------------------------------
                                                 Khanh Nguyen
                                                 President, COO and CFO
                                                 (Principal Financial Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4797 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4797

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
                  coastwise trade for a hopper barge.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 19, 1994

Mr. Lancaster introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
                  coastwise trade for a hopper barge.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa<gr-thn-eq>tives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That 
notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. 
U.S.C. 883) and section 12106 of title 46, United States Code, the 
Secretary of Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation 
with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for 
the vessel known as hopper barge E-15 (North Carolina State official 
number 264959).
                                 <all>
```
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4830

To amend title 18 of the United States Code with respect to the admissibility

of certain evidence.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 26, 1994

Mr. COOPER (for himself, Mr. GORDON, Mr. BREWSTER, Mrs. LLOYD, Mr.

TANNER, Mr. CLEMENT, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey,

Mr. TAUZIN, Mr. MCCURDY, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. PENNY,

Mr. GUNDERSON, Mr. MORAN, and Mr. MAZZOLI) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18 of the United States Code with respect

to the admissibility of certain evidence.

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

3 SECTION 1. ADMISSIBILITY OF CERTAIN EVIDENCE.

4 Chapter 223 of title 18, United States Code, is

5 amended by adding at the end the following:

6 ‘‘§ 3509. Admissibility of evidence obtained by search

7 or seizure

8 ‘‘(a) EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY OBJECTIVELY REA9 SONABLE SEARCH OR SEIZURE.—Evidence which is ob-
2

•HR 4830 IH

1 tained as a result of a search or seizure shall not be ex2 cluded in a proceeding in a court of the United States

3 on the ground that the search or seizure was in violation

4 of the fourth amendment to the Constitution of the United

5 States if the search or seizure was carried out in cir6 cumstances justifying an objectively reasonable belief that

7 it was in conformity with the fourth amendment. The fact

8 that evidence was obtained pursuant to and within the

9 scope of a warrant constitutes prima facie evidence of the

10 existence of such circumstances.

11 ‘‘(b) EVIDENCE NOT EXCLUDABLE BY STATUTE OR

12 RULE.—Evidence shall not be excluded in a proceeding

13 in a court of the United States on the ground that it was

14 obtained in violation of a statute, an administrative rule

15 or regulation, or a rule of procedure unless exclusion is

16 expressly authorized by statute or by a rule prescribed by

17 the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority.

18 ‘‘(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—This section shall

19 not be construed to require or authorize the exclusion of

20 evidence in any proceeding.’’.

21 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

22 at the beginning of chapter 223 of title 18, United States

23 Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘3509. Admissibility of evidence obtained by search or seizure.’’.

Æ
exv10w6



 





EXHIBIT 10.6




AMENDMENT No. 1

To

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




Paragraph 3 of the Employment Agreement made as of October 1, 2006, by and between BICUS Services
Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation, Mercer Insurance Group, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation,
Mercer Insurance Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, and Paul R. Corkery, is hereby amended and
extended in its entirety to read as follows:



3. Term of Agreement. The Executive’s employment under this Agreement shall commence
on the date of this Agreement and, except as otherwise provided herein, shall continue until March
31, 2010; provided, however, that commencing on March 31, 2008 and each March 31 thereafter, the
term of this Agreement shall automatically be extended for one additional year beyond the term
otherwise established unless, prior to such March 31st date, the Company shall not have given a
Notice of Extension in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.



As of January 1, 2007, the annual Base Compensation for Paul R. Corkery pursuant to Paragraph 5 of
the aforementioned agreement is $203,846.



In witness whereof, the parties have executed this Notice of Extension as of the date noted below.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 
Paul
R. Corkery

	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	BICUS Service Corporation	 	 	 	Mercer Insurance Group, Inc.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Attest:

	 	 	 	 	 	Attest:	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Mercer Insurance Company	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Attest:
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 






Date: March 15, 2007