alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.4
 
                        CONSENT OF GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO.
 
March 1, 1999
 
Board of Directors
Sirrom Capital Corporation
500 Church Street, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37219
 
Re:  Registration Statement of The FINOVA Group Inc. ("FINOVA") relating to
     Common Stock being registered in connection with the merger transaction
     between FINOVA and Sirrom Capital Corporation ("Sirrom" or the "Company")
 
Gentlemen:
 
Reference is made to our opinion letter dated January 6, 1999 with respect to
the exchange of shares of Common Stock of FINOVA to be received for each
outstanding share of Common Stock of Sirrom pursuant to the Agreement and Plan
of Merger dated January 6, 1999.
 
The foregoing opinion letter is provided for the information and assistance of
the Board of Directors of the Company in connection with its consideration of
the transaction contemplated therein and is not to be used, circulated, quoted
or otherwise referred to for any other purpose, nor is it to be filed with,
included in or referred to in whole or in part in any registration statement,
proxy statement or any other document, except in accordance with our prior
written consent. We understand that the Company has determined to include our
opinion in the above-referenced Registration Statement.
 
In that regard, we hereby consent to the reference to the opinion of our Firm
under the "SUMMARY -- The Merger -- Opinion of Sirrom's Financial Advisors" and
"PROPOSAL 1: THE MERGER AND RELATED WITHDRAWAL OF SIRROM'S ELECTION TO BE
TREATED AS A BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY -- Opinions of Sirrom's Financial
Advisors" and to the inclusion of the foregoing opinion in the Proxy
Statement/Prospectus included in the above-mentioned Registration Statement. In
giving such consent, we do not thereby admit that we come within the category of
persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933
or the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission
thereunder.
 
Very truly yours,
 
/s/ GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO.
---------------------------------------------------------
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
IA

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 58

Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained in section 402(c)

of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect to Vietnam.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 9, 1999

Mr. ROHRABACHER introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained

in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect

to Vietnam.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Congress does not approve the extension of the au4 thority contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of

5 1974 recommended by the President to Congress on June

6 3, 1999, with respect to Vietnam.

Æ
<PAGE>
                              Second Supplement to
                       Appendix A to Employment Agreement
                        Between Stewart Enterprises, Inc.
                                       and
                              Randall L. Stricklin



                  Base Salary, Bonus Compensation and Benefits
                  --------------------------------------------



1.       Effective April 28, 2003, Employee's Base Salary shall be $300,000.

2.       For Fiscal Year 2003 ("FY 2003"), the Employee shall be eligible to
         receive a Bonus of up to $287,500. For Fiscal Year 2004, the Employee
         shall be eligible to receive a Bonus of up to $300,000.

         (a) Maximum Bonus potential for FY 2003 will be determined based on the
         criteria approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of
         Directors.


         No other items or portions of items in Appendix A as previously
         supplemented are affected by this Supplement.


                                      Agreed to and accepted:

                                      STEWART ENTERPRISES, INC.


Date:   June 25, 2003                 By: /s/ JAMES W. MCFARLAND
                                          ----------------------
                                            James W. McFarland
                                     Compensation Committee Chairman


                                      EMPLOYEE


Date:   June 25, 2003                 /s/ RANDALL L. STRICKLIN
                                      ------------------------
                                        Randall L. Stricklin
exv10w31



 





Exhibit 10.31


May 29, 2003



Joel Kirschbaum

527 Madison Avenue

17th Floor

New York, NY 10022


Dear Joel:


Pursuant to Section 4(b) of your employment agreement dated as of July 1, 1997,
as amended (the “Employment Agreement”) between Alliance Gaming Corporation
(the “Company”) and you and with respect to each Employment Year for the
remainder of the Term, the Company deems that (i) in the event that the Company
elects in its discretion to employ your services in connection with a
“significant financing”, then the closing of each “significant financing” as
defined in said Employment Agreement shall be an appropriate performance goal
for the Company, and the Company agrees to pay you an aggregate target Bonus of
0.3125% of the Value of such significant financing less $62,500 (Value being
determined as set forth in Section 4 (b) paragraph 2 subsection (y)) upon
closing of each such significant financing (the “Financing Compensation”) and
(ii) in the event that the Company elects in its discretion to employ your
services in connection with a “significant merger”, then the closing of each
“significant merger” as defined in said Employment Agreement shall be an
appropriate performance goal for the Company, and the Company agrees to pay you
an aggregate target Bonus of 0.3875% of the Value of such significant merger
less $100,000 (Value being determined as set forth in Section 4 (b) paragraph 2
subsection (x)) upon closing of each such significant merger (the “Merger
Compensation”). Each such Financing Compensation amount and each such Merger
Compensation amount shall be inclusive of any minimum Bonuses otherwise due to
you for each significant financing or significant merger, as applicable.
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, you shall be entitled to only
the minimum Bonus upon closing of the currently proposed sale of United Coin
and you shall be entitled to minimum Bonuses for each such “significant
financing” and “significant merger” for which you do not otherwise receive the
Financing Compensation or the Merger Compensation.


Further, pursuant to Board action taken on April 22, 2003, the Company has
elected to employ your services for the Company’s next “significant financing”
(i.e., a refinancing of the Company’s outstanding bank debt and bonds, whether
in one or a series of related transactions) upon closing of which the Financing
Compensation shall be paid to you as set forth above.


Defined terms used herein (other than those terms specifically defined herein)
shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Employment Agreement. This
agreement does not change any terms in the Employment Agreement other than
those terms specifically set forth above.


Sincerely,



ALLIANCE GAMING CORPORATION


/s/ Robert L. Miodunski


AGREED to and ACCEPTED as of the date hereof:


/s/ Joel Kirschbaum





Joel Kirschbaum
Dismissed and Opinion Filed June 28, 2016 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01465-CV 

MARVIN BROCK, Appellant 

V. 

RJT PROPERTY & MANAGEMENT LLC, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-14321 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart 

Opinion by Chief Justice Wright 

The filing fee in this case is overdue. By letter dated May 2, 2016, we informed appellant 

that the check used by appellant to pay the filing fee in this case had been returned to the Court 

for insufficient funds. We directed appellant to pay the overdue fee within ten days, and 

cautioned appellant that failure to do so might result in the dismissal of this appeal without 

further notice. To date, appellant has not paid the filing fee. 

Moreover, by letter dated February 16, 2016, we questioned our jurisdiction over this 

appeal. Specifically, we notified appellant that it did not appear that the trial court had signed an 

appealable order or judgment in this case. We directed appellant to provide the Court with a 

supplemental clerk’s record containing a copy of the order appellant sought to appeal within ten 
 –2– 

days. To date appellant has not provided the Court with a supplemental transcript as requested 

nor has he otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding this appeal. 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3 (b),(c). 

151465F.P05 

 

/Carolyn Wright/ 

CAROLYN WRIGHT 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MARVIN BROCK, Appellant 

No. 05-15-01465-CV V. 

RJT PROPERTY & MANAGEMENT LLC, 

Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-14321. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. 

Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. 

 It is ORDERED that appellee RJT PROPERTY & MANAGEMENT LLC recover its 

costs of this appeal from appellant MARVIN BROCK. 

Judgment entered June 28, 2016.
Before the Second Division,

March 30, 1961

No. 65349.

#### B. Shackman & Co. and S. Stern Henry & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 304972-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Bao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of paper boxes the same in all material respects as those the subject of *B. Shackman & Co.*v. *United States*(26 Cust. Ct. 111, C.D. 1309), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IIA

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 123

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

NOVEMBER 2 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Received

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2001, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 106–275, is further amended by striking

4 the date specified in section 106(c) and inserting
2

HJ 123 RDS

1 ‘‘November 3, 2000’’, and by adding, at the end, the fol2 lowing new section:

3 ‘‘SEC. 120. Notwithstanding any other provision of

4 this joint resolution, except section 107, $7,100,000 shall

5 be available for obligation by the Administrator of General

6 Services for expenses necessary to carry out the Presi7 dential Transition Act of 1963 (3 U.S.C. 102 note).’’.

8 Passed the House of Representatives November 2,

9 2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
FORM OF
STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
FOR THE GRANT OF
NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTIONS UNDER THE
STEWART ENTERPRISES, INC.
2010 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN




---



##### 



(a)
    
    In the event of
 (i)
    
    death,(ii)
    
    disability within the meaning of Section 22(e)(3) of the Code,(iii)
    
    retirement on or after reaching age 65,(iv)
    
    early retirement with the approval of the Board of Directors or(v)
    
    any termination, other than termination for cause, after Optionee has
completed 15 or more continuous years of full-time service with the Company,
 the Option must be exercised within one year following termination of employment, after
which time the Option shall terminate.
    
  2




---



##### 



3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



STEWART ENTERPRISES, INC.By:Thomas J. Crawford,President and Chief Executive OfficerOptionee 5
No. 58379.

protests 188217-K, etc. (New York).

#### Steelmasters, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures or figurines similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the items of merchandise marked with the letter “A” were held dutiable as follows: (a) As to the items entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption prior to May 28, 1950, at 20 percent under paragraph 1547 (a); and (b) as to items entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption subsequent to May 28, 1950, at 10 percent under said paragraph 1547 (a), as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T. D. 52476).
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 71921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22999]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12228]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: ``The Heart of Zen'' 
Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad 
pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for 
temporary display in the exhibition ``The Heart of Zen'' at the Asian 
Art Museum, San Francisco, California, and at possible additional 
exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural 
significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display 
within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. 
I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published 
in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eb988e889f828485d9dfded2ab989f8a9f8ec58c849d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f98a9c9a8d909697cbcdccc0b98a8d988d9cd79e968f">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-22999 Filed 10-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 58828.

protest 236110-K (New York).

#### Berlage & Wolff Co. and Lo Curto & Funk, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

An examination of the record failing to disclose evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s action, the protest was overruled.
106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 83

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the

fiscal year 2000, and for other purposes.
106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 83

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2000, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 106–62 is further amended by striking

4 ‘‘November 18, 1999’’ in section 106(c) and inserting
2

•HJ 83 EH

1 ‘‘December 2, 1999’’, and by striking ‘‘$346,483,754’’ in

2 section 119 and inserting ‘‘$755,719,054’’. Public Law

3 106–46 is amended by striking ‘‘November 18, 1999’’ and

4 inserting ‘‘December 2, 1999’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 18,

1999.

Attest:

Clerk.
Case No. 6,609.

#### HOLLENBACK v. MILLER et ux.

[3 Cranch, C. C. 176.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

May Term, 1827.

Trover and Conversion — Husband and Wire.

Trover will not lie against husband and wife for a conversion to her use only.

[Action of trover by William Hollenbaek against Michael Miller and wife.] The declaration stated that the defendants converted the goods “to her own use.”

J. Dunlop, moved in arrest of' judgment, that there cannot be a conversion to the use of the wife during the coverture. 2 Saund. 47, note; Rhemes v. Humphreys, Cro. Car. 254; Perry v. Diggs, Cro. Car. 494.

Judgment arrested (nem. con.) for that reason.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Corporate
Express, Inc. 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-01-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-03-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                          89,027
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  393,998
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,796
<INVENTORY>                                    141,895
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               657,189
<PP&E>                                         183,825
<DEPRECIATION>                                  61,815
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,409,776
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          327,419
<BONDS>                                        480,120
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                     543,878
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,409,776
<SALES>                                      1,103,005
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,103,005
<CGS>                                          820,558
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  239,422
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,324
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 35,701
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,021
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             20,781
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,781
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .27
        

</TABLE>
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1014

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the

exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 4, 1999

Mr. PICKETT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make

permanent the exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Employee Educational

5 Assistance Act of 1999’’.

6 SEC. 2. EMPLOYER-PROVIDED EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 127 of the Internal Reve8 nue Code of 1986 (relating to educational assistance pro9 grams) is amended by striking subsection (d) and by re10 designating subsection (e) as subsection (d).
2

HR 1014 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

2 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

3 May 31, 1999.

Æ
No. 53386.

protest 118677-K (Cleveland).

#### Harmar Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Report

Submitted to the

United States Congress

by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Twentieth Report to Congress on Progress Made in Licensing

and Constructing the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline

August 2015
- 2 -

Twentieth Report to Congress on the Alaska Pipeline

I. Executive Summary

The Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission (Commission) submits this report 

pursuant to section 1810 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).

1 Section 1810 

of EPAct 2005 requires that the Commission submit to Congress semi-annual reports 

describing the progress made in licensing and constructing an Alaska natural gas pipeline 

and any impediments thereto.

This report provides an update from the Commission’s Nineteenth Report, 

submitted in February 2015. That report highlighted the termination of Docket No. 

PF09-11-000 by TransCanada Alaska Company, LLC (TC Alaska) and the Office of the 

Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects.

II. Status Report

As stated in the previous report, at TC Alaska’s request, the Commission

terminated the prefile review process for the Alaska Pipeline Project in Docket No. PF09-

11-000. Thus, the Commission staff has no progress to report.

 1 P.L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005), 42 U.S.C § 15801 et seq.