alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 164 (Monday, August 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22520]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Office of Management

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of Membership of the Performance Review Board (PRB).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the names of members of the 
Department of Education's PRB.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Althea Watson, Director, Executive 
Resources Team, Human Resources Group, Office of Management, Department 
of Education, Room 1135, FOB-10B, 600 Independence Avenue, SW, 
Washington, DC 20202, Telephone: (202) 401-0546. Individuals who use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 4314(c) (1) through (5) of Title 5, 
U.S.C. requires each agency to establish one or more Senior Executive 
Service (SES) PRBs. The Board shall review and evaluate the initial 
appraisal of a senior executive's performance along with any comments 
by senior executives and any higher level executive and make 
recommendations to the appointing authority relative to the performance 
of the senior executive, including making recommendations on 
performance awards.
    The PRB is also responsible for providing recertification 
recommendations for career SES appointees in accordance with section 
3393a of Title 5, U.S.C. and section 317.504(f) of Title 5, Code of 
Federal Regulations. Recommendations on SES pay level adjustments shall 
also be made by the PRB.

Membership

    The following executives of the Department of Education have been 
selected to serve on the Performance Review Board of the Department of 
Education: Gary Rasmussen, Chair, David Longanecker, Co-Chair, Mary 
Ellen Dix, Philip Link, William Haubert, Susan Craig, Steven Winnick, 
Carol Cichowski, Thomas Skelly, Ricky Takai, Larry Oxendine, Linda 
Paulsen, Maureen McLaughlin, John Higgins, Mary Jean LeTendre, Patricia 
Guard, Alicia Hoffman, Edward Fuentes, Dennis Berry, Mitchell Laine, 
David Frank, Linda Roberts, Raymond Pierce, Howard Moses, Jamienne 
Studley, Claudio Prieto. The following executives have been selected to 
serve as alternate members of the Performance Review Board: Hazel 
Fiers, Charles Hansen, Therese Dozier, Thomas Hehir.

    Dated: August 20, 1997.
Richard W. Riley,
Secretary of Education.
[FR Doc. 97-22520 Filed 8-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
#### William CANADAY, Appellant, v. Lance GRESHAM, etc., et al., Appellees.

Nos. 77-1900, 77-2028.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 15, 1978.

Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Goldman, Goldstein & Paczier, Miami, for appellant.

I. R. Mayers, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant/petitioner, William Canaday, the natural father of two minor children, appeals from two orders denying his motions to vacate the final judgment of *83adoption rendered in favor of appel-lee/respondent, Lance Gresham, the stepfather of the children and the husband of Jane Canaday Gresham, the children’s mother and former wife of appellant.

After carefully reviewing the record, briefs and arguments of counsel, it is our opinion that the trial judge erred in denying appellant’s motions to vacate the final judgment of adoption previously entered in favor of appellee. The record affirmatively reveals that appellant had no notice of the institution of these proceedings to adopt his children. Personal service of process was never made nor attempted. In addition, even though it appears that the whereabouts of appellant could have been ascertained by appellee through appellant’s mother, who lived only one mile from appel-lee, constructive service of process was never utilized as a means of notification.

Notice is a fundamental prerequisite to any adoption proceeding. *Fielding v. Highsmith,*152 Fla. 837, 13 So.2d 208 (1943); *Grissom v. Dade County,*293 So.2d 59 (Fla.1974); *In re Adoption of Shaw,*198 So.2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Section 63.-122(2), Florida Statutes (1977). As appellant, the natural father of the children, never received the requisite notice, the final judgment of adoption is void.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
EX 99.1
                                                     Press Release Dated 8-28-08

                     FIRST LITCHFIELD FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                 13 North Street, Litchfield, Connecticut 06759


NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release


          First Litchfield Financial Corporation Declares Cash Dividend

Litchfield,  Connecticut--August  28,  2008--The  Board  of  Directors  of First
Litchfield  Financial  Corporation  (trading symbol FLFL.OB) (the "Company") the
holding  company for The First  National Bank of  Litchfield  (the "Bank") today
declared a quarterly  cash dividend of 15 cents per share payable on October 23,
2008, to shareholders of record on September 11, 2008.

Statements  contained in this news release  contain  forward-looking  statements
within the  meaning of the  Private  Securities  Litigation  Reform Act of 1995.
These statements are based on the beliefs and expectations of management as well
as the  assumption  made using  information  currently  available to management.
Since these statements reflect the views of management concerning future events,
these statements involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions,  including, among
others:  changes in market  interest  rates and  general and  regional  economic
conditions; changes in government regulations; changes in accounting principles;
and the quality or composition  of the loan and investment  portfolios and other
factors that may be described in the  Company's  quarterly  reports on Form 10-Q
and its annual report on Form 10-K,  each filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission,  which are  available at the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission's
internet website (www.sec.gov) and to which reference is hereby made. Therefore,
actual future  results may differ  significantly  from results  discussed in the
forward-looking statements.

                                 About the Bank

One of the oldest nationally  chartered banks in the country, The First National
Bank of Litchfield has served the communities of northwestern  Connecticut since
1814. It has nine full-service  offices in Canton,  Goshen,  Litchfield,  Marble
Dale, New Milford, Roxbury, Washington and two in Torrington. The Bank maintains
a full-service Trust department that offers asset management, custody and estate
settlement  services  to  individuals,   non-profit  and  commercial  customers.
Additionally,  the Bank offers  non-deposit  retail investment  products such as
mutual  funds,  annuities and insurance  through its  relationship  with Infinex
Investments,  Inc. The Bank's subsidiary,  First Litchfield Leasing Corporation,
provides middle market equipment  leasing/financing to the commercial markets of
Connecticut and Massachusetts. The Company's website address is www.fnbl.com.

Contact:   Joseph J. Greco, President and CEO (860) 567-6438

                                       ###


                                       -3-
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

131102 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. ROBERT LITTLE and BARBARA Stephen J. Markman, LITTLE, Justices Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 131102 COA: 257781 Oakland CC: 1998-006136-CZ THOMAS TRIVAN, DARLENE TRIVAN, STEVEN KIN, and ROSALYN KIN, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the March 23, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l1023 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2006

Clerk
Exhibit 32.1


  Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

                            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 on Form 10-QSB of Big Sky Industries I,
Inc. (the  "Company") for the quarter ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Ramon
Chimelis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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; and

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


    Date: August 24, 2007                           /s/Ramon Chimelis
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Ramon Chimelis
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
Certificate Representing 400 7.25% Common Securities



 Exhibit 4.5 
 THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT TRANSFERABLE EXCEPT IN COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW AND SECTION 5.11 OF THE DECLARATION OF TRUST AND ONLY IN CONNECTION WITH A SIMULTANEOUS DELEGATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF THE EXPENSE AGREEMENT REFERRED TO THEREIN

  

			
	 Certificate Number
	 	Number of Common
Securities                                
	  
 CI-1
	 	400                                      
                  

 Certificate Evidencing Common Securities 
 of 
 Fifth Third Capital Trust VI 
 7.25% Common Securities 
 (liquidation amount $25 per Common Security) 
 Fifth Third Capital Trust VI, a statutory trust created under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Issuer Trust”), hereby certifies that Fifth Third Bancorp
(the “Holder”) is the registered owner of 400 common securities of the Issuer Trust representing common undivided beneficial interests in the assets of the Issuer Trust and designated the 7.25% Common Securities (liquidation amount $25 per
Common Security) (the “Common Securities”). Except in accordance with Section 5.11 of the Declaration of Trust (as defined below), the Common Securities are not transferable and, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any attempted
transfer hereof other than in accordance therewith shall be void. The designations, rights, privileges, restrictions, preferences and other terms and provisions of the Common Securities are set forth in, and this certificate and the Common
Securities represented hereby are issued and shall in all respects be subject to the terms and provisions of, the Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust of the Issuer Trust, dated as of October 30, 2007, as the same may be amended from time
to time (the “Declaration of Trust”), among Fifth Third Bancorp, as Sponsor, Wilmington Trust Company, as Property Trustee, Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee, the Administrative Trustees named therein, and the holders, from
time to time, of undivided beneficial interests in the assets of the Issuer Trust including the designation of the terms of the Common Securities as set forth therein. The Issuer Trust will furnish a copy of the Declaration of Trust to the Holder
without charge upon written request to the Issuer Trust at its principal place of business or registered office. 
 Upon receipt of this certificate, the
Holder is bound by the Declaration of Trust and is entitled to the benefits thereunder. 
 Terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth in
the Declaration of Trust. 
 [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, one of the
Administrative Trustees of the Issuer Trust has executed this certificate on behalf of the Issuer Trust this 30th day of October, 2007. 
  

			
	FIFTH THIRD CAPITAL TRUST VI
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Mahesh Sankaran

		 	 Name: Mahesh Sankaran
 Administrative Trustee




  

 2
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 163 (Friday, August 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22477]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 62 F.R., Monday, 
July 21, 1997, Page No. 38996.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING: 2:00 p.m., Thursday, 
August 14, 1997.

CHANGES IN THE AGENDA: The Federal Trade Commission has changed the 
date of its previously announced Oral Argument Meeting to September 3, 
1997, 2:00 p.m.
Benjamin I. Berman,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-22477 Filed 8-20-97; 10:54 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
#### Ray HODGES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James H. SHORT et al., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 2776.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Third Circuit.

June 27, 1969.

Rehearing Denied July 24, 1969.

Donald Garrett and B. Dexter Ryland, Alexandria, for plaintiff-appellant.

Gist, Methvin & Trimble, by DeWitt T. Methvin, Jr., Alexandria, for defendant-appellee.

Before TATE, HOOD and MILLER, JJ-

MILLER, Judge.

This is a companion appeal to that presented in Linceum v. Short, 225 So.2d 38 (rendered this date). For the reasons set forth by our opinion there, we affirm the trial court’s decision sustaining the summary judgment in favor of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.

Accordingly the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Costs of the appeal are to be paid by plaintiff-appellant.

Affirmed.

On Application for Rehearing.

En Banc. Rehearing denied.
EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES



|                                              |  |                                  
|--------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------
|Name                                          |  | Jurisdiction inwhich Incorporated
|HARTMARX CORPORATION (Registrant)             |  | Delaware                         
|Consolidated Apparel Group, Inc.              |  | Delaware                         
|Coppley Apparel Group Limited .               |  | Ontario, Canada                  
|Direct Route Marketing Corporation            |  | New Hampshire                    
|Hart Schaffner & Marx                         |  | New York                         
|HMX Sportswear, Inc.                          |  | New York                         
|National Clothing Company, Inc.               |  | New York                         
|Hickey-Freeman Co., Inc.                      |  | Delaware                         
|HMX Luxury, Inc.                              |  | New York                         
|International Womens Apparel, Inc.           |  | Texas                            
|Jaymar-Ruby, Inc. (d/b/a Trans-Apparel Group) |  | Indiana                          
|Anniston Sportswear Corporation               |  | Indiana                          
|Simply Blue Apparel, Inc.                     |  | Delaware                         
|Sweater.com Apparel, Inc.                     |  | Delaware                         
|NYC Sweaters, Inc.                            |  | New York                         
|Universal Design Group, Ltd.                  |  | New York                         
|M. Wile & Company, Inc. (d/b/a HMX Tailored)  |  | New York                         
|Exclusively Misook Apparel division           |  |                                  
|Zooey Apparel, Inc.                           |  | Delaware                         

The names of 36 subsidiaries are omitted, as such subsidiaries, considered in the aggregate as a
single subsidiary, would not constitute a significant subsidiary. The Registrant owns, directly or indirectly, 100% of the voting securities of both the named and unnamed subsidiaries, except for one of the unnamed subsidiaries, which is owned 50.1%
by a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant. All of the above subsidiaries (including unnamed subsidiaries) are included in the consolidated financial statements of the Registrant and its subsidiaries.
#### Sherman L’HOMMEDIEU, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 78-1286.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 9, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 13, 1978.

PER CURIAM.

In his motion filed under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850, appellant alleges that he did not have counsel when he was convicted in 1952 and sentenced to three years imprisonment. Obviously, appellant is not now serving this three-year sentence. The motion does not state whether he is presently incarcerated and, if so, how or whether his original sentence affected his current sentence. *See State*v. *Reynolds,*238 So.2d 598 (Fla.1970). If he merely seeks to expunge his conviction from the record, he should say so pursuant to the authority of Weir *v. State,*319 So.2d 80 (Fla.2d DCA 1975). Therefore, the denial of his motion is affirmed without prejudice.

GRIMES, C. J., and SCHEB and RYDER, JJ., concur.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

In his pro se petition for rehearing appellant has stated additional facts. Since this court cannot entertain new facts not presented to the court below, the petition is denied. The appellant is at liberty to file in the trial court another motion under Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.850 setting forth under oath such additional facts as may be pertinent to his request for relief.

GRIMES, C. J., and SCHEB and RYDER, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 101


		
			EXHIBIT 10.1
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			AMENDMENT TO
		

		
			HARVEST NATURAL RESOURCES
		

		
			2010 LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
		

		
			This amendment (this “Amendment”) to the Harvest Natural Resources 2010 Long Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is adopted by Harvest Natural Resources, Inc. (“Harvest”) effective September 9, 2015.
		

		
			WHEREAS, Harvest previously established the Plan; 
		

		
			WHEREAS, Harvest desires to amend the Plan to (i) increase the number of shares of Harvest’s common stock that may be granted during the life of the Plan by 5,000,000 shares and (ii) increase the number of shares of Harvest’s common stock that may be granted under the Plan in the form of Full Value Awards by 1,725,000 shares; and
		

		
			WHEREAS, Harvest’s stockholders approved this Amendment at a special meeting of stockholders held on September 9, 2015;
		

		
			NOW, THEREFORE, Sections 4.2(a) and 4.2(b) of the Plan are hereby amended and restated in their entirety as follows:
		

		
			4.2 Dedicated Shares; Maximum Awards.
		

		
			(a) The aggregate number of shares of Stock with respect to which Awards may be granted under the Plan is 7,725,000.
		

		
			(b) The aggregate number of shares of Stock with respect to which Full Value Awards (awards of Stock under the Plan which are not Options or SARs) may be granted under the Plan is 2,425,000.
		

		
			Capitalized terms not defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings given to them in the Plan.  The other provisions of the Plan, including the other provisions of Section 4.2, remain unchanged and unaffected by this Amendment.  This Amendment is adopted, and shall be considered, as an amendment to the Plan and shall form a part thereof, and the provisions of the Plan, as amended by this Amendment, are hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects.
Exhibit 10.1


 





  


November 3, 2015


  


Weyco Group, Inc.


333 West Estabrook Boulevard


Glendale, WI 53212


 


		Re:	Renewal
                                         of Expiration Date for that certain $60,000,000.00 Working Cash® Line
                                         of Credit (“Line of Credit”) extended by PNC Bank, National Association
                                         (the “Bank”) to Weyco Group, Inc. (the “Borrower”)



 


Ladies/Gentlemen:


 


We are pleased to inform
you that the Line of Credit has been renewed. The Expiration Date of the Line of Credit, as set forth in that certain promissory
note executed and delivered by the Borrower to the Bank dated November 5, 2013 (the “Note”) and/or that certain
loan agreement governing the Line of Credit (the “Loan Agreement”), has been extended from November 5, 2015
to November 4, 2016, or such later date as may, in the Bank’s sole discretion, be designated by the Bank by written notice
from the Bank to the Borrower, effective on November 6, 2015. All sums due under the Note, the Loan Agreement or any related documents,
instruments and agreements (collectively as amended from time to time, the “Loan Documents”) shall be due and
payable on the Expiration Date, as extended hereby. All other terms and conditions of the Loan Documents governing the Line of
Credit remain in full force and effect.


 


It has been a pleasure
working with you and I look forward to a continued successful relationship. Thank you again for your business.


 


Very truly yours,


 


PNC
BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION


 


 


By:
/s/ James McMullen


 


James
McMullen


Senior
Vice President


  


 


Form 7F-1 – Multistate Rev. 5/14
Order enlered November 8, 2012

In The

 ourt o[

No. 05-12-00550-CR

JOHN RICHARD BUSBEY, Appellant

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F10-11264-K

ORDER

Appellant’s October 26, 2012 motion to supplement the record on appeal and to hold the

briefing schedule in abeyance is GRANTED to the extent we ORDER the trial court clerk to

file, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order, a supplemental clerk’s record containing

copies of all pretrial motions,, the jail writ, docket sheet, pass slips, business records filed, and

jail disposition sheet.

The time to file appellant’s brief is EXTENDED to FORTY-FIVE DAYS from the date

of this order.

We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send copies of this order, by electronic

transmission, to:

Dallas County District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmons
The Dallas County District Clerk, Criminal Records Division

Counsel for all parties

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE