alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex10g.htm


    
      

      

    

     

    
      EXHIBIT
        10(G)

      


      Base
        Salaries for Named Executive Officers

      


      On
        November 30, 2006, the Compensation Committee set the 2007 annual base salaries
        for the following 2007 named executive officers of FNB Corporation, effective
        January 1, 2007.

      


      Effective
        May 1, 2007, the Compensation Committee increased the base salary of Greg
        W.
        Feldmann, Chief Operating Officer of the Corporation in connection with his
        appointment to serve in the additional role of President and Chief Executive
        Officer of the Corporation’s subsidiary, First National Bank.

      


      Effective
        September 1, 2007, the Compensation Committee increased the base salary of
        William B. Littreal, who became Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation
        upon
        Mr. Daniel A. Becker’s retirement on March 30, 2007.

      


      The
        current base salaries for the named executive officers follow:

      


      


      
        	
                Name1

              	
                Title

              	 	
                2007

              	 
	
                William
                  P. Heath, Jr.

              	
                President
                  and Chief Executive Officer

              	 	$	
                286,650

              	 
	
                Gregory
                  W. Feldmann

              	
                Chief
                  Operating Officer and President and Chief Executive Officer of
                  First
                  National Bank

              	 	$	
                203,208

              	 
	
                William
                  B. Littreal

              	
                Executive
                  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

              	 	$	
                161,000

              	 
	
                David
                  W. DeHart

              	
                Market
                  President (New River Valley) and Director of Commercial
                  Banking

              	 	$	
                149,760

              	 
	
                Keith
                  J. Houghton

              	
                Executive
                  Vice President and Chief Risk Officer

              	 	$	
                154,668

              	 


      

      


      


      1  Mr.
        Daniel A. Becker retired on March 30, 2007.




    
 

    1
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

March 15, 2006

Via EDGAR
Securities and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Re:  Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
     Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     In connection with the Annual Report of LL&E Royalty Trust (the "Trust") on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, not in
its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, that to its knowledge:

          (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
     Trust at the dates and for the periods presented.

     The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of
the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.

                                          JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
                                          Trustee for LL&E Royalty Trust

                                          By:        /s/ MIKE ULRICH
                                            ------------------------------------
                                                        Mike Ulrich
                                              Vice President and Trust Officer
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1166 

To extend the authorization of the Kalaupapa National Historical Park 

Advisory Commission. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 6, 2005 

Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. INOUYE) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To extend the authorization of the Kalaupapa National 

Historical Park Advisory Commission. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION. 

4 Section 108(e) of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to estab5 lish the Kalaupapa National Historical Park in the State 

6 of Hawaii, and for other purposes’’ (16 U.S.C. 410jj–7) 

7 is amended by striking ‘‘twenty-five years from’’ and in8 serting ‘‘on the date that is 45 years after’’. 

Æ
----- Forwarded by Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US on 08/10/2010 09:55 AM

----- |------------> | From: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Cc: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |Fred Talcott/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Michael Horowitz/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |08/10/2010 09:37 AM | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------| |revised GACT memo | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------|

(See attached file: SI RICE NESHAP Area Source Analysis 8-10-10.doc) Melanie King Energy Strategies Group Sector Policies and Programs Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Mail Code D243-01 RTP, NC 27711 Phone: (919) 541-2469 Fax: (919) 541-5450 king.melanie@epa.gov
No. 00-787.

#### Haynes et al. v. United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
----

----

|   | 1. | The      Report 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      Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                |   |   |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/  Thomas      W. Maher                                 |   |   |   |
|                                                                |   |   |   |
| Thomas      W. MaherChief      Financial OfficerApril      14, 2008 |   |   |   |

----
#### S. H. Pomerance Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7906.

Entry No. 719757, etc.

*456(Decided November 13, 1950)

*Viault & Viault (Albert Viault*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

LawreNCB, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the merchandise the subject of these appeals are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Gothic Watch Co.,*23 Cust. Ct. 235, Reap. Dec. 7712, affirming the judgment in *Gothic Watch Co.*v. *United States,*19 Cust. Ct. 309, Reap. Dec. 7438, and that the record in Reap. Dec. 7712, *supra,*may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts, I find that the attempted appraisement embodied in the second return of value by the appraiser of the merchandise covered by each of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the annexed schedule, which is marked “A” and made a part of this decision, was illegal, null, and void, and that the appraiser’s original return of value in each case, as reported by him to the collector of customs, constituted his appraisal of the merchandise pursuant to section 500 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 150.0), and was final and conclusive in the absence of any appeal pursuant to section 501 of said act (19 U. S. C. § 1501).

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
ALD-013 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 22-2367

___________

IN RE: C. JOSEPH MOS-BEY,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

(Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 2:20-cv-20719)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

October 20, 2022

Before: HARDIMAN, RESTREPO, and BIBAS, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: October 27, 2022)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Pro se petitioner C. Joseph Mos-Bey seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the 

District Court to rule on a petition he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order 

entered on August 31, 2022, the District Court dismissed his petition and declined to 

issue a certificate of appealability. In light of the District Court’s action, Mos-Bey’s

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.
2

mandamus petition no longer presents a live controversy. Therefore, we will dismiss it as 

moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996) (“If 

developments occur during the course of adjudication that eliminate a plaintiff’s personal 

stake in the outcome of a suit or prevent a court from being able to grant the requested 

relief, the case must be dismissed as moot.”).

To the extent that Mos-Bey discusses the District Court’s decision in his 

supplemental filings in this Court, mandamus is not a substitute for appeal. See Cheney v. 

U.S. Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 367, 380-81 (2004). If Mos-Bey wishes to seek appellate 

review of the District Court’s decision with respect to his habeas petition, he may file a 

notice of appeal in the District Court within the time period set forth in Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(1)(A).
#### COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 5917.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

May 13, 1977.

Woodley, Fenet & Ranier by Drew A. Ranier, Lake Charles, for defendants-appellants.

Brame, Bergstedt & Brame by David A. Fraser, Lake Charles, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before WATSON, FORET and HEARD, JJ.

WATSON, Judge.

Commercial Union Insurance Company sued Willie R. Harris and his liability insur*1302er; Travelers Insurance Company, for $6,310 in damages to a tractor-trailer rig, owned by Commercial’s insured, Seventy-Four Quebec, Inc. Commercial is subrogated to the claim which resulted from a collision between its insured’s 1964 White tractor and semi-trailer and Harris’ 1974 Peterbilt tractor and semi-trailer.

The parties stipulated liability on the part of Travelers and Harris. The only issue considered by the trial court was damages. Four experts testified for plaintiff and one additional repair estimate was put into evidence by stipulation. Three experts testified for defendants.

The trial court concluded that:

> “. . . the plaintiff’s witnesses had more experience and there is no reason for the Court to believe that their testimony was unrealiable [sic].” (TR. 137)

The trial court awarded $3,110 for the tractor, consisting of $3,360 in repairs, less a $250 deductible; $2,200 for the trailer, consisting of its value of $3,000 less salvage of $550 and a deductible of $250. The total award to plaintiff was $5,310.

The only substantial issue on appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding damages. Not only was there no abuse of discretion, but the judgment is in accord with the preponderance of the evidence.

The trial judge has much discretion as to quantum. LSA-C.C. art. 1934. Where experts differ, the trier of fact is entitled to evaluate their testimony and to choose between them. *Wiley v. Travelers Insurance Company,*300 So.2d 555 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1974) writ denied, La., 303 So.2d 187.

The judgment of the trial court, therefore, is affirmed and costs are taxed against appellants.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2251 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2251

   To designate the United States courthouse located at 709 West 9th 
     Street, Juneau, Alaska, as the Robert Boochever United States 
                              Courthouse.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 29, 2012

  Mr. Begich (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To designate the United States courthouse located at 709 West 9th 
     Street, Juneau, Alaska, as the Robert Boochever United States 
                              Courthouse.

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

SECTION 1. ROBERT BOOCHEVER UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The United States courthouse located at 709 West 
9th Street, Juneau, Alaska, shall be known and designated as the 
``Robert Boochever United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the United States 
courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Robert Boochever United States Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
No. 99-809.

#### LaTrieste Restaurant *&*Cabaret, Inc., dba The Diamond Club *v.*Village of Port Chester et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
PUBLIC LAW 111–134—JAN. 29, 2010 123 STAT. 3493 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3767: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009): 

Nov. 16, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–134 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 170 North 

Main Street in Smithfield, Utah, as the ‘‘W. Hazen Hillyard Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. W. HAZEN HILLYARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 170 North Main Street in Smithfield, Utah, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘W. Hazen Hillyard Post 

Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘W. Hazen Hillyard Post Office Building’’. 

Approved January 29, 2010. 

Jan. 29, 2010 

[H.R. 3767] 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1 with PUBLAW
### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (Mailcode 7101 M) Washington, D.C. 20460

OPPTS-RCS-OMB-7f (revised 11/15/2010) If you have any questions about this regulatory action or this documentation, please call the contact: Name: eMail: Phone: 

### Title of Action: 

## Documentation of Changes Made During Review Under Executive Order 12866

Docket #: EPA-HQ- FRL#: RIN: 2070-

This action was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). According to section 6(a)(3)(E) of the Executive Order, whenever the Agency makes publicly available an action that was reviewed under Executive Order 12866, the Agency is also required to:

(1) Make available to the public a copy of the information that was provided to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review under the Executive Order, i.e., the text of the draft action and, if applicable, an assessment of the potential costs and benefits; as well as additional information required for those actions that are determined to be economically significant under section 3(f) of the Executive Order (see section 6(a)(3)(B) & (C)); (2) Identify for the public any substantive changes made to the draft submitted to OMB, using a method that is complete, clear and simple; and (3) Identify for the public those substantive changes made at the suggestion or recommendation of OIRA/OMB. 

### For this action, were substantive changes made during the review? [Check the appropriate answer.]
Yes. [The information identified in items 1-3 below is included in the docket, as applicable.] No. [Only the information identified in item 1 below is included in the docket.] 

### Accordingly, the Agency has included the following information in the public docket for this action: [Check the appropriate box(es).]
(2) Documentation of any substantive changes that were made to the draft document that was submitted to OIRA/OMB for review, when compared with what completed review, using one of the following methods (select one): (1) A copy of the information that was submitted to OIRA for review under the Executive Order.

(3) Documentation of those substantive changes made at the suggestion or recommendation of OMB , if any, are identified in the document using one of the following methods (select one): (a) A copy of the draft document submitted, with redline and strikeout to show all the substantive changes that were made during the review. (b) A document that identifies the substantive changes that were made during the review, with page and paragraph references to the draft document that was submitted.

(a) Through attributions to OMB in the redline and strikeout version or other document identifying the changes made at OMB's recommendation. (c) Other (please describe):

(b) Other (please describe):

Ellie Clark clark.ellie@epa.gov 202-564-2962 

### Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate (MDI) And Related Compounds Action Plan
OPPT-2011-0182 (n/a) ZA15

The redlined changes were all made at OMB's recommendation.
Order entered May 10, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00252-CV

ERIN WALKER, Appellant

V.

PEGASUS EVENTING, LLC, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District Court

Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 100256-422

ORDER

Before the Court is appellees/cross-appellants’ May 7, 2019 motion for an extension of 

time to file their brief and for leave to file an amended brief. We GRANT the motion to the 

extent that we ORDER the amended brief received by appellees on May 7, 2019 filed as of the 

date of this order. We DENY the motion as moot to the extent appellees request an extension of 

time to file their brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.1(a). 

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE
Order entered January 24, 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 19 - 01057 - CR No. 05 - 19 - 0105 9 - CR TAVARIO JERMAINE SMI TH, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee O n Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 001 - 87850 - 2018 , 001 - 87851 - 2018



### O RDER Before the Court are appellant’s January 21, 2020 second motion s to extend t ime to file appellant’s brief

(s)

. We GRANT the motion s and ORDER appellant’s brief (s) filed on or before February 2 1 , 20 20

. We caution appellant that further reques ts for extension of time are disfavored.

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III JUSTICE
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1124 

To postpone by 1 year the date by which countries participating in the 

visa waiver program shall begin to issue machine-readable tamper-resistant entry passports. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2005 

Mr. LUGAR introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To postpone by 1 year the date by which countries participating in the visa waiver program shall begin to issue 

machine-readable tamper-resistant entry passports. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR THE ISSUANCE 

4 OF MACHINE-READABLE, TAMPER-RESISTANT 

5 PASSPORTS. 

6 Section 303 of the Enhanced Border Security and 

7 Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (8 U.S.C. 1732) is amend-
2 

•S 1124 IS

1 ed by striking ‘‘2005’’ each place it appears and inserting 

2 ‘‘2006’’. 

Æ
No. 40550.

#### Protest 947981-G of Stevenson Bros. & Co. (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

The question at issue here is whether the drums made in the United States should have been marked to show the country of origin of the contents thereof, which was mineral oil imported from Canada. On the authority of *Sheldon*v. *United States*(23 C. C. P. A. 168, T. D. 48013) and Zanes v. *United States*(T. D. 49553) the protest was overruled.