alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1


 


WAIVER


 


Reference is made to that
certain Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among Nokia, Inc. (“Parent”),
North Acquisition Corp. (“Purchaser”), and NAVTEQ Corporation (the “Company”),
dated as of October 1, 2007 (the “Merger Agreement”).  Capitalized terms used but not defined herein
shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Merger Agreement.


 


Pursuant to Section 9.05
of the Merger Agreement, Parent, Purchaser and the Company agree as follows:


 


1.             To
waive the obligation of Parent under Section 3.02(f) of the Merger
Agreement to provide at least 30 days’ notice prior to the Effective Time of
its determination that (a) all Performance Share Units and Restricted
Share Units granted to (x) non-employee directors of the Company and (y) Mr. Ferris
Carpenter, and (b) all Performance Share Units and Restricted Share Units
scheduled to vest on or prior to October 20, 2008, shall be converted into
the right to receive the Merger Consideration in accordance with Section 3.02(f) of
the Merger Agreement; and


 


2.             Any
fractional Nokia Shares that may result from the conversion, pursuant to
Sections 3.02(b) and 3.02(c) of the Merger Agreement, of Performance
Share Units and Restricted Share Units held by award-holders located in Canada
or Singapore shall be rounded down to the nearest whole share, notwithstanding
the provisos of Sections 3.02(b) and 3.02(c) of the Merger Agreement.


 


[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]


 

















 


This Waiver may be executed in one or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which
shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument.  This Waiver shall not be construed as a
waiver of any other term or condition of the Merger Agreement.


 


DATED: July 2, 2008


 


	
   

  	
  NOKIA, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Bruce Bowden

  
	
   

  	
  Name:  VP, Global M&A

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  NORTH ACQUISITION CORP.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Bruce Bowden

  
	
   

  	
  Name:  VP, Global M&A

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  NAVTEQ CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ David B. Mullen

  
	
   

  	
  Name:  David B. Mullen

  
	
   

  	
  Title:  EVP & CFO
No. 51628.

#### Protests 108538-K, etc., of Central Madeira Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Plaintiff, 

- against - 

DAVID FORREST and T. BEAUCLERC ROGERS IV, 

Defendants. 

Civil Action 

No. 02-CV-4435 

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF PLAINTIFF 

Pursuant to the Court’s Notice of January 3, 2003, Plaintiff Lexington Insurance 

Company (“Lexington”) states that its parent corporations, which together own 100% of Lexington, are National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Birmingham Fire 

Insurance Company of Pennsylvania, and The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, 

each of which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of American International Group, Inc. (“AIG”), a 

publicly held corporation. AIG also owns majority interests in Transatlantic Holdings, Inc. and 

21st Century Insurance Group, the common stock of each of which is publicly traded, and an interest in IPC Holdings, Ltd., the common stock of which is publicly traded. 

Dated: January 8, 2003 

Of Counsel: 

Ira J. Dembrow 

Scott M. Mory 

CAHILL GORDON & REINDEL

By: __________________________ 

Edward P. Krugman 

80 Pine Street 

New York, New York 10005 

(212) 701-3000 

/s/ Edward P. Krugman 

Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 23 Filed 01/06/2003 Page 1 of 2
-2- 

Of Counsel: 

Jeffrey R. Lerman 

Glenn F. Rosenblum 

-andMONTGOMERY, MCCRACKEN, WALKER

& RHOADS, LLP

123 South Broad Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109 

(215) 772-1500 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 23 Filed 01/06/2003 Page 2 of 2
DAVID I. DAVIS, ESQUIRE

DAVIS & BUCCO, P.C.

909 North Bethlehem Pike, Suite 200

P.O. Box 785

Spring House, PA 19477

Attorney I.D. # 29991

215-540-9050 - Phone Attorney for Defendants

______________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Troy Slemmer :

: Civil Action No. 02-CV-4349

and :

:

Jack W. Kuhns, Sr. :

:

and :

:

Joshua W. Kuhns :

:

Plaintiffs :

:

v. :

:

McCarthy Masonry & Concrete, Inc. :

:

and :

:

James McCarthy :

:

and :

:

Alice McCarthy :

:

Defendants :

______________________________________________________________________________

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

TO THE PROTHONOTARY:

Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of Defendants, McCarthy Masonry & Concrete, Inc.,

Case 2:02-cv-04349-JG Document 5 Filed 08/06/2002 Page 1 of 2
James McCarthy and Alice McCarthy, in the above-captioned matter.

______________________________

DAVID I. DAVIS, ESQUIRE

DATED: ____________

Case 2:02-cv-04349-JG Document 5 Filed 08/06/2002 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 1 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 2 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 3 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 4 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 5 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 6 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 7 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 8 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 9 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 10 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 11 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 12 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 13 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 14 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 15 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 16 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 17 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 18 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 19 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 20 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 21 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 22 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 23 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 24 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 25 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 26 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 27 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 28 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 29 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 30 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 31 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 32 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 33 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 34 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 35 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 36 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 37 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 38 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 39 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 40 of 41
Case 2:05-cv-01351-RK Document 5-1 Filed 05/25/05 Page 41 of 41
EXHIBIT 11
Flagstar Capital Corporation
Computation of Net Earnings per Share

Earnings per common share are computed by subtracting from the applicable
earnings the dividend requirements on preferred stock to arrive at earnings
available to common stock and dividing this amount by the weighted average
number of common stock outstanding during the period.

|                                                   |  |                                   |           |  |      |   |           | 
|-------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------- | --------- |  | ---- | - | --------- | 
|                                                   |  | For the quarter ended March 31,   |          
|                                                   |  | 2001                              |           |  | 2000 |  
|                                                   |  |                                   |           |  |      |  
|                                                   |  | (In thousands, except share data) |          
|Net earnings                                       |  | $                                 | 1,892     |  |      | $ | 1,660     | 
|                                                  
|                                                  
|                                                  
|                                                  
|Less: preferred stock dividends                    |  |                                   | 1,222     |  |      |   | 1,222     | 
|                                                   |  |                                   |           |  |      |  
|Net earnings available to common
     Stockholders |  | $                                 | 670       |  |      | $ | 438       | 
|                                                   |  |                                   |           |  |      |  
|Average common shares outstanding                  |  |                                   | 1,000,000 |  |      |   | 1,000,000 | 
|                                                  
|                                                  
|                                                  
|                                                  
|Net earnings per share  basic                     |  | $                                 | 0.67      |  |      | $ | 0.44      | 

12
No. 64077.

#### Franklin B. Howland, for: The Lawson Company *v.*United States,

protest 59/21966 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protest was dismissed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices 

# Order

October 14, 2014

150053

- 4 ( 54 )

ZACHARY KOTT

- MILLARD,

Plaintiff

- Appell ant

, SC: 150053

v COA: 314971

Grand Traverse CC :

2012

- 028981

- NO

CITY OF TRAVERSE CITY and DUNCAN L.

CLINCH MARINA,

Defendants/Cross

- Plaintiffs,

and

BARRY SMITH,

Defendant

- Appell ee

, and

ROBERT COLE, CARL REICH ELECTRIC,

INC., FLOTATION DOCKING SYSTEMS, INC.,

WAGGENER ELECTRIC COMPANY,

SAUNDERS ELECTRIC, INC.,

SIMPLEXGRINNELL, LP, PHILLIP NAULT,

an d DALE STEVENS ,

Defendants,

and

GLAWE, INC., SMITHGROUP JJR, LLC

, d/b/a

SMITHGROUP JJR, and RHOADES

ENGINEERING CORP.,

Defendants/Cross

- Defendants.

__________________________________________ /

MICHAEL J. LONG, Personal Representative of

the Estate of MICHAEL KNUDSEN,

Plaintiff

- Appell ant

, SC: 150054

v COA: 314975

Grand Traverse CC:

2012

- 029041

- NO2

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

October 14, 2014 CITY OF TRAVERSE CITY and DUNCAN L.

CLINCH MARINA,

Defendants/Cross

- Plaintiffs,

and

BARRY SMITH,

Defendant/Cross

- Plaintiff

Appell ee

, and

ROBERT COLE, CARL REICH ELECTRIC,

INC., WAGGENER ELECTRIC COMPANY,

SAUNDERS ELECTRIC, INC.,

SIMPLEXGRINNELL, LP, PHILLIP NAULT,

and DALE STEVENS,

Defendants,

and

GLAWE, INC., SMITHGROUP JJR, LLC. d/b/a

SMITHGROUP JJR, and WHOADES

ENGINEERING CORP.,

Defendants/Cross

- Defendants.

__________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant

- appellee Barry Smith to

extend the time for filing his answer to the applications for leave to appeal is GRANTED.

The answer will be accepted as timely filed if filed on or before October 28, 2014.

Clerk
# sec5_sf133_schp_2020

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2020-08	&"Arial,Bold"&9V SF 133/Sch P - &P	&"Arial,Bold"&10IRC Meeting Handout 12/5/19
EXHIBIT 32.2



STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF

2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



The undersigned, Terry Davis, is the Chief Financial Officer of Pocahontas Bancorp, Inc. (the Company).



This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the
Company of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2005 (the Report).



By execution of this statement, I certify that:



| | A) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | B) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods covered by the Report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This statement
is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



|                        |  |                           
|----------------------- |  | --------------------------
|February 10, 2006 Dated |  | /s/ Terry DavisTerry Davis
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                       3,539,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               23,452,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (24,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                     192,463,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,870,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             258,131,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     87,275,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        213
<COMMON>                                           335
<OTHER-SE>                                 165,956,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               258,131,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,946,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,032,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                10,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,457,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                914,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   329,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            329,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   585,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
472158

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

THE CHESTER COUNTY HOSPITAL :

:

 v. :

:

INDEPENDENCE BLUE CROSS, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-2746

QCC INSURANCE COMPANY, :

KEYSTONE HEALTH PLAN EAST, :

and KEYSTONE MERCY HEALTH PLAN :

ORDER

AND NOW, this ____ day of ____________, 2003, as provided for by the Protective

Order that was entered in this matter, it is hereby further Ordered that:

1. The transcript of the July 7, 2003 hearing in this matter is removed from the

docket in its present, unsealed, form;

2. Pages 1 through 37 (through line 9) of the transcript are refiled, in the usual

manner.

3. Pages 37 (starting with line 9) through 55 of the transcript, which pages contain

argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel The Production Of Documents By Defendant

Independence Blue Cross that was filed under seal, are re-filed under seal. 

BY THE COURT:

_____________________________

 J.

Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 96 Filed 07/22/2003 Page 1 of 1
DRAFT

ID

Simple or

Special Name Type Description Error Message 

49 SPECIAL

USSGL Accounts and Borrowing Authority Indicator Compound

USSGLs 404200, 404400, 414000, 414100, 414300, 

414400, 414500, 414800, 414900Some USSGL accounts 

are limited to TAS with Borrowing from the Treasury or Borrowing from the Public.

USSGLs 404200, 404400, 414000, 414

414400, 414500, 414800, 414900 areT

account is limited to TAS with Borrowinor Borrowing from the Public. 

50 SPECIAL

USSGL Accounts and Contract Authority Indicator Compound

USSGLs 403200, 403400, 413000, 413100, 413200, 

413300, 413400, 413500, 413600, 413800, 413900Some 

USSGL accounts are limited to TAS with Contract Authority.

413300, 413400, 413500, 413600, 413

reported USSGL account is limited to TAuthority. 

106 SPECIAL

Restricted Use of USSGL 413700 with BEA "D" and PYA "P" Compound

Reporting USSGL account 413700 with BEA Category Indicator "D" and Prior Year Adjustment Code "P" is restricted to specific TAS.

TAS is not permitted to report USSGL 4Category Indicator "D" and Prior Year A

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Validations - Summary

Part 2SUPPLEMENT

Bulletin No. 2020-15 DRAFT VII VSR - 1
(Reap. Dec. 10361)

Entry No. 936, etc.

#### Brown, Alcantar & Brown, Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided November 5, 1962)

*Sharretts, Paley & Carter*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Guilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “B,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the parties hereto that the merchandise which is the subject of the appeals for reappraisement listed in Schedule B, hereto attached and made a part hereof, consists of phonograph records exported from Mexico after August 1, 1960.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that phonograph records are not on the list of articles published in T.D. 54521 and are subject to appraise*436ment under the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (Public Law 927 — 84th Congress 2nd Session).

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the prices, at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise undergoing reappraisement, at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the prices shown on Schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof for each of the items enumerated therein with or without qualifying words and with or without additional symbols.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals for reap-praisement listed in Schedule B are hereby submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the phonograph records in question is statutory export value and hold that such value therefor is the prices shown in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, for each of the items enumerated therein with or without qualifying words and with or without additional symbols.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 38526

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff-Respondent ,

v.

FIDEL FLORES RODRIGUEZ ,

Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2011 Unpublished Opinion No. 747

Filed: December 15, 2011

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS I S AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fo urth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Elmore County. Hon. Richard D. Greenwood , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of two and one

- half years , for possession of a controlled substance

, affirmed

.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________
Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Fidel Flores Rodriguez was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance . I.C. §

37

- 2732(c)(1) . The dis trict court sentenced Rodriguez to a unified term of seven years, with a

minimum period of confinement of two and one

- half years . However, the district court retained

jurisdiction and sent Rodriguez to participate in the rider program. Rodriguez appeals, cl aiming

his sentence is excessive. 1

1 Rodriguez was also found guilty of misdemeanor frequenting a place where controlled substances are known to be located. However, Rodriguez does not challenge that judgment of conviction or sentence in this appeal.2 Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Rodriguez ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION 

ADMINISTRATIVE TRUST

FUND, DIVISION OF 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION, 

DEPARTMENT OF 

FINANCIAL SERVICES,

Appellant,

v.

TOMPKINS BECKWITH, 

INC./ARGONAUT INSURANCE 

COMPANY, LINDA COOPER 

(SURVIVING SPOUSE OF

MARK C. COOPER),

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-5778

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 5, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims.

Ralph J. Humphries, Judge.

Date of Accident: November 4, 1982.

Cynthia Arnold Shaw, Department of Financial Services, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Bill McCabe, Longwood, and Anthony J. Salzman, Gainesville, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.