alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2 Fairways Frisco Fee Allocation Agreement


    Exhibit
      10.2

     

     

    
      	
              Date

            	
              April
                15, 2005

            
	
              To:

            	
              David
                Bowe, Gary Boyd, Jim Leslie, David Stringfield, Brant
                Bryan

            
	
              From:

            	
              Cathy
                Sweeney

            
	
              Company

            	
              Fairways
                Equities, LLC

            
	
              Re:

            	
              Fairways
                Frisco Fee Allocations

            


    

    


    This
      memo
      serves as written documentation supporting the agreement between Ascendant
      Solutions, Inc. (ASDS) and Fairways Equities, LLC, regarding the allocation
      of
      fees paid by Fairways Frisco LP (FFLP) to Fairways Equities, LLC
      (FELLC).

    


    Employees
      of ASDS and the partners of FELLC acknowledge that each were involved in
      supplying resources to execute the acquisition of various Frisco Square
      partnerships by FFLP, beginning in December, 2004. ASDS and FELLC also
      acknowledge that certain fees will be paid through the course of operations
      from
      FFLP to FELLC, as follows:

    


    
      	 	 	
              Financing
                Fee of .5% of all financings completed by FELLC related to the Frisco
                Square partnerships

            


    

    


    Asset
      Management Fee of .25% of asset value on an annual basis

    


    Administrative
      and Management Services Fee of $10,000 monthly

    


    In
      consideration for services rendered, on the date set above, and in the future,
      ASDS and FELLC hereby agree that fees received in accordance with the FFLP
      partnership agreement will be allocated 75% to FELLC and 25% to
      ASDS.

    


    Agreed
      to
      and accepted this 31st day of May, 2005

    


    


    
      	
              /s/
                David Bowe 

            	 	
              /s/
                James C Leslie

            	 	
              /s/
                Cathy R Sweeney

            
	
              David
                Bowe

            	 	
              James
                C Leslie, Member

            	 	
              Cathy
                R Sweeney, Member

            
	
              President,
                Ascendant Solutions

            	 	
              Fairways
                Equities, LLC

            	 	
              Fairways
                Equities, LLC

            
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
              /s/
                A Brant Bryan

            	 	
              /s/
                David F Stringfield

            	 	 
	
              A
                Brant Bryan, Member

            	 	
              David
                F Stringfield, Member

            	 	 
	
              Fairways
                Equities, LLC

            	 	
              Fairways
                Equities, LLC

            	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 


    

     

    -49-
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION





PURSUANT
TO RULE 13A-14(B) OR RULE 15D-14(B)





OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EPL Intermediate, Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen
E. Carley, President 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, to
the best of my knowledge 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 result of operations of the
      Company.




Date:
August 12, 2010





/s/ Stephen E. CarleyStephen
      E. CarleyPresidentEPL
      Intermediate, Inc.




This
certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not
for any other purpose. A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 has been provided to EPL Intermediate, Inc. and will be retained by
EPL Intermediate, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
AttigIp.gQIøuitttutU,hpartutirntDIRECTORBruceW.Dixon,M.D.Ms.JoyceFpps.I)irectorDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtectionBureauofAirQualityRachelCarsonBuilding400MarketStreet,P.O.Box8468Harrisburg,PA17105-8468AIRQUALITYPROGRAM30139Street—Bldg.#7Pittsburgh,PA15201-1891Phone:(412)578-8120Fax:(412)578-8144June22,2010BOARDOFHEALTHPaulM.King,Esq.,Q.E.P.ChairLeeHarrison,M.D.VicechairAlM.Ahmed,P.E.Rev.RickyV.BurgessDonaldS.Burke,M.D.Hon.JoanCleary,R.N.JamesM.Flynn,Jr.LidiaC.Turzai,M.D.WilliamYoungbloodDearMs.Epps:EnclosedaretwopapercopiesandadiskcontainingapdfversionofarevisiontoAlleghenyCounty’sportionofthePennsylvaniaStateImplementationPlanfortheAttainmentandMaintenanceofthe8-HourOzoneNationalAmbientAirQualityStandards.ChangesmadetoArticleXXI,AirPollutionControlRulesandRegulations,andCountyOrdinance16782arerelatedtoregulationsincorporatingCTGsforLargeApplianceandMetalFurnitureSurfaceCoatingProcesses,FlatWoodPanelingCoatingProcess,andPaper,Film,andFoilSurfaceCoatingProcesses-Sections2105.77,2105.78,and2105.79respectivelyaswellasrelateddefinitionsinSection2101.20andexistingSurfaceCoatingProcessesregulationsatSection2105.10.ThisSIPrevisionisbeingtrackedasourinternalRevision65.ThisSIPRevisionwasthesubjectofapubliccommentperiodfromOctober19,2009untilNovember20,2009thedateofthepublichearing.ItwasapprovedbytheBoardofHealthonMarch10,2010,enactedbyCountyCouncilonMay4,2010,approvedandsignedbytheAlleghenyCountyChiefExecutiveonMay14,2010,andbecameeffectiveMay24,2010.WerequestthatthePennsylvaniaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtectionapprovethisrevisionandforwardthehardcopiesanddisktotheU.S.EPARegionifiwitharecommendationforapproval.CopiesofthissubmittalhavealsobeensenttoyourRegionVPittsburghOffice.Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleasecallmeatthenumberaboveoremailmeatjthompson@achd.net.cc:ArleenShulmanStephenHeplerEnclosuresI—inrflIDZSincere!JamesThompson,ManagerAirQualityProgram25-093008
#### Molly SEALEY, Appellant, v. CORONET INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 86-2770.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 1, 1987.

Nancy J. Pollock, North Miami, for appellant.

Goodhart & Rosner and Paul W. Hum-bert, Miami, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is the second appeal in this case following our reversal of a final summary judgment in a declaratory decree action entered in favor of the defendant Coronet Insurance Company. In the prior appeal, the trial court found no insurance coverage for the insured Kathryn Sealey for alleged *1085injuries which, it is claimed, she negligently inflicted on the plaintiff Molly Sealey in an automobile accident, *Sealey v. Coronet Ins. Co.,*487 So.2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Upon remand, the trial court conducted further proceedings in which additional evidence was received relative to the application of the family member exclusion of the subject insurance policy. Based on this additional evidence, the trial court again entered a final summary judgment in favor of the defendant Coronet Insurance finding no insurance coverage in the cause based on the family member exclusion.

This time we affirm the final summary judgment under review because, simply stated, the evidence is now clear from this record that the plaintiff Molly Sealey — who is the mother-in-law and, therefore, a family member of the insured Kathryn Sealey— lived in a single, joint household, which included the insured Kathryn Sealey, on the date of the subject automobile accident. She did not, as urged in the first appeal, live in her own self-contained, self-supported household. The record demonstrates, without material dispute, that both parties contributed to the support of one another in a single joint household, wherein (a) Kathryn Sealey contributed $100-$150 a month for household expenses, and (b) Molly Sealey paid the balance of such joint expenses. There was no formal or informal rental arrangement established between the parties so as to create, in essence, a landlord-tenant relationship. It, therefore, cannot be said, as urged, that two self-contained, self-supporting households existed under one roof in this case. This being so, the family member exclusion of the subject insurance policy was fully applicable. *See General Guar. Ins. Co. v. Broxsie,*239 So.2d 595, 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970).

Affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-50043

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARGARITO IBANEZ-MARTINEZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 7:07-CR-123-ALL

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Through counsel, Margarito Ibanez-Martinez appeals his jury trial

conviction for conspiracy to transport illegal aliens for financial gain. IbanezMartinez, who has been a fugitive since the selection of the jury, was tried and

sentenced in absentia. The record reflects that the district court based its

decision on the difficulty in rescheduling the trial; the burden on the

Government and the Government’s key witness, who was under a hold by the

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 13, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-80043

2

Department of Homeland Security; and the unlikelihood that Ibanez-Martinez

would return or be captured in the near future. 

The Government contends that this court should dismiss IbanezMartinez’s appeal pursuant to the “fugitive disentitlement doctrine.” Counsel

for Ibanez-Martinez does not address this issue.

The “fugitive disentitlement doctrine”is an equitable doctrine that“limits

a criminal defendant’s access to the judicial system whose authority he evades.”

Bagwell v. Dretke, 376 F.3d 408, 410-13 (5th Cir. 2004) (internal citation

omitted). Ibanez-Martinez has not been returned to custody since he became a

fugitive on September 24, 2007. Under the circumstances, dismissal of IbanezMartinez’s appeal is appropriate. It is unlikely that Ibanez-Martinez will return,

under his own volition or otherwise, in the foreseeable future. Dismissal of this

appeal is further supported by enforceability concerns, as any judgment on

review may be impossible to enforce, and would serve an important deterrent

function and “advance an interest in efficient, dignified appellate practice.”

Ortega-Rodriguez v. United States, 507 U.S. 234, 240-42 (1993); see Bagwell, 376

F.3d at 410-13.

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED.
[No. 34425-1-I.

Division One.

August 26, 1996.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. David Whisler, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Sno-homish County, No. 93-1-01120-7, Paul D. Hansen, J., entered April 1, 1994. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Ellington, J., concurred in by Coleman and Becker, JJ.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 31, 2013

NO. 03-13-00484-CR

Jason William Ausburn, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, ROSE AND GOODWIN

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being 

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that the appeal should be dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the appeal be dismissed in accordance with 

the opinion of this Court; that the appellant pay all costs relating to this appeal; and that this 

decision be certified below for observance.
### Swanson, Brian (OST) From: 

### Sent: To: 

### Subject:

----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Niccum· To: rick@ brainerdairport.com Rick Adair <Rick@BrainerdAirport.com> Thursday, August 16, 2012 9:14AM Devany, Dennis (OST); Swanson, Brian (OST) Fw: Air Travel

Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11 :49 AM Subject: Air Travel 

### '· ,;\_'..l(pnr>I'I'•T/1')' 

## I ' •. '.;\_., I..H'il

### t·, \ 

## !\ 

# · .. J:rOPFJIATIOi\!:3

Please except Sky west to be our Air service provider. Based on the options you stated SkyWest offers the Delta connection and appears our best option. Thank you! Paul

Paul Niccum CEO 

### d: 218.824.1804 c: 612.877.1709 a: Qniccurn@rangedalivers.com www.rangedelivers.corn

1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         47,865
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  228,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                   8,821
<INVENTORY>                                    7,645
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               305,125
<PP&E>                                         2,016,323
<DEPRECIATION>                                 364,726
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,232,711
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          348,490
<BONDS>                                        1,534,377
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,669
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,033,991
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,232,711
<SALES>                                        357,900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               357,900
<CGS>                                          205,816
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  205,816
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               83,659
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               377
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             22,318
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                46,292
<INCOME-TAX>                                   14,727
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            31,565
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   31,565
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.17
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 1 Received in Senate (RDS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 1

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 3, 2001

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Providing for a conditional adjournment of the House of Representatives 
         and a conditional recess or adjournment of the Senate.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Saturday, 
January 6, 2001, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Saturday, January 
20, 2001; and that when the House adjourns on Saturday, January 20, 
2001,

it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, January 30, 2001, or until 
noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of 
business on Saturday, January 6, 2001; Sunday, January 7, 2001; Monday, 
January 8, 2001; Tuesday, January 9, 2001; Wednesday, January 10, 2001; 
Thursday, January 11, 2001; Friday, January 12, 2001; Saturday, January 
13, 2001; Sunday, January 14, 2001; Monday, January 15, 2001; Tuesday, 
January 16, 2001; Wednesday, January 17, 2001; Thursday, January 18, 
2001; or Friday, January 19, 2001; on a motion offered pursuant to this 
concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
recessed or adjourned until 10 a.m. on Saturday, January 20, 2001, or 
until such time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader 
or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until noon on 
the second day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 3, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 246

Providing for negotiations to establish a United States Congress-Russian

Federation Parliament joint taskforce on antiterrorism.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 9, 2001

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania (for himself, Mr. KERNS, Mr. CRAMER, Mr.

ROHRABACHER, Mr. CLEMENT, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr. PLATTS,

Mr. REYES, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, and Mr. SMITH of Michigan)

submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for negotiations to establish a United States Congress-Russian Federation Parliament joint taskforce on

antiterrorism.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS; DECLARATION OF POLICY.

4 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following:

5 (1) On September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous

6 violence were committed against the United States

7 and its citizens when terrorists hijacked and de8 stroyed four civilian aircraft, crashing two of them
2

•HCON 246 IH

1 into the towers of the World Trade Center in New

2 York City, and a third into the Pentagon outside

3 Washington, D.C.

4 (2) In the past, similar acts of violence have

5 been committed against the Russian Federation and

6 its citizens.

7 (3) Such acts continue to pose an unusual and

8 extraordinary threat to the national security and for9 eign policy of both the United States and the Rus10 sian Federation.

11 (b) DECLARATION OF POLICY.—Congress—

12 (1) condemns in the strongest possible terms

13 the terrorists who planned and carried out the Sep14 tember 11, 2001, attacks against the United States,

15 as well as their sponsors; and

16 (2) reaffirms the importance of joint efforts be17 tween the United States and the Russian Federation

18 to provide the fullest possible level of cooperation on

19 antiterrorism activities.

20 SEC. 2. UNITED STATES CONGRESS-RUSSIAN FEDERATION

21 PARLIAMENT JOINT TASKFORCE ON

22 ANTITERRORISM.

23 (a) NEGOTIATIONS.—The Speaker of the House of

24 Representatives (in consultation with members of the

25 Duma Congress Study Group) and the majority leader of
3

•HCON 246 IH

1 the Senate shall seek to enter into negotiations with ap2 propriate officials of the State Duma and the Federation

3 Council of the Russian Federation for the establishment

4 of a joint taskforce on antiterrorism.

5 (b) MEMBERSHIP.—The joint taskforce shall consist

6 of members of the House of Representatives and the Sen7 ate and members of the State Duma and the Federation

8 Council.

9 (c) DUTIES.—The joint taskforce shall provide for in10 creased cooperation between the United States Congress

11 and the Russian Federation Parliament on issues relating

12 to antiterrorism.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 32.2

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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Aearo Company I (the
"Company"), on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jeffrey S. Kulka, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to my 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 Company.


                                             /s/ Jeffrey S. Kulka
                                             --------------------
                                             Jeffrey S. Kulka
                                             Senior Vice President,
                                             Chief Financial Officer
                                             and Secretary
November 21, 2005
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 284

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs

should provide the flag of the United States for placement on the

gravesites of recipients of the Medal of Honor.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 6, 2001

Mr. SHOWS (for himself, Mr. FROST, Mr. GIBBONS, Mr. GILMAN, Mr.

GRUCCI, Ms. HART, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. PLATTS, Ms.

ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. STEARNS, and Mr. WEXLER) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

Veterans’ Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Secretary

of Veterans Affairs should provide the flag of the United

States for placement on the gravesites of recipients of

the Medal of Honor.

Whereas the Medal of Honor is the highest award for valor

which can be bestowed upon an individual serving in the

Armed Forces of the United States;

Whereas the Medal of Honor is generally presented to its recipient by the President, in the name of the Congress,

and is therefore often referred to as the Congressional

Medal of Honor;
2

•HCON 284 IH

Whereas 3,455 Medals of Honor have been awarded for acts

of heroism since the Civil War; and

Whereas the flag of the United States is made available for

placement at gravesites in veterans’ cemeteries maintained by the Federal government: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the

3 Secretary of Veterans Affairs should make the flag of the

4 United States available to immediate family members of

5 deceased recipients of the Medal of Honor, and to veterans

6 service organizations and other parties responsible for the

7 maintenance of private gravesites of Medal of Honor re8 cipients, for placement on such gravesites.

Æ