alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.26


 


CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT


 


Consulting Services
Agreement (the “Agreement”), effective is by and between Sweet Success
Enterprises Inc., with it’s principle office at 1250 NE Loop 410, San Antonio,
TX. (hereinafter the “Client”), and W. Curtis Hargis Co., 4904 East Lamonta
Springfield, Missouri 65809 (hereinafter the “Consultant”).


 


WHEREAS, Client finds
that the Consultant is willing to perform certain work hereinafter described in
accordance with the provisions of this Agreement; and


 


WHEREAS, Client finds
that the Consultant is qualified to perform the work, all relevant factors
considered, and that such performance will be in furtherance of Clients
business.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein and intending to be
legally bound, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


1. SERVICES


1.1  Services to
Client: The Consultant shall provide the following (“Services”) to Client:
Arrange meetings between Client and Wal-Mart Inc. to allow Client to discuss a
possible agreement to sell Client’s products.


 


2. PAYMENT


2.1  Payment for
Services: The Consultant will be paid as follows: 25,000 options to purchase
Clients common stock, at $.70 per share, upon signing of this agreement. If the
negotiations between Client and Wal-Mart Inc., as a result of the introduction
to the Retailer by Consultant result, within 90 days of this contract, any
agreement or contract for products to be supplied by Client to Retailer, Consultant shall receive 400,000
options to purchase Clients common stock, at $.10 per share on the date this vending agreement is signed.
Client will register these shares promptly when the company enacts its next
registration.


2.2 The Consultant will be paid a 1 % cash commission of
the net sales realized by the Client to the Retailer for the term of seven
years. These commissions will be paid to the Consultant by the 15th
of the month following the month of Client’s receipt of payment from the
Retailer.


 


3.             FACSIMILE SIGNATURE


 


3.1           Execution and delivery of this
Agreement by exchange of facsimile copies bearing the facsimile signature of a
party hereto shall constitute a valid and binding 


 

















 


execution
and delivery of this Agreement by such party.
Such facsimile copies shall constitute enforceable original documents.


 


	
  Client: Sweet Success Enterprises Inc.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Date:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Consultant: W. Curtis

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ W. Curtis Hargis

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Date:

  	
  8/5/05
Exhibit 32.1

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Winfield
Capital Corp. (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Paul A. Perlin, Chief Executive 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:

         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.


Dated: February 11, 2005               By: /s/ PAUL A. PERLIN
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Paul A. Perlin
                                           Chief Executive Officer & Director


         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

                                      -24-
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

           CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Gary Blair, hereby certify that the annual report on Form 10-K of the
Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Registrant.


                                                    /s/  Gary Blair
                                                    ---------------------
                                                     Gary Blair
                                                    Executive Vice-President
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                                     March 27, 2003



     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 905 has
been provided to Block Communications, Inc. and will be retained by Block
Communications, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissions or
its staff upon request.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3327 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an extension of 

the work opportunity tax credit for veterans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 23, 2013 

Ms. KELLY of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

an extension of the work opportunity tax credit for veterans. 

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 WORK OPPORTUNITY TAX 

4 CREDIT FOR VETERANS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (B) of section 

6 51(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 

7 by inserting ‘‘(December 31, 2018, in the case of any 

8 qualified veteran)’’ before the period at the end. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3327 IH

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

2 this section shall apply to individuals who begin work for 

3 the employer after December 31, 2013. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3239 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3239

Making automatic continuing appropriations for the continuation of FBI 
 emergency and critical training programs in the event of a Government 
                               shutdown.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 3, 2013

 Mr. Cassidy (for himself, Mr. Tiberi, Mr. Farenthold, Mr. Collins of 
   Georgia, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Nugent, Mr. Reichert, and Mr. Scalise) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Appropriations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
Making automatic continuing appropriations for the continuation of FBI 
 emergency and critical training programs in the event of a Government 
                               shutdown.

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

SECTION 1. AUTOMATIC CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE CONTINUATION OF 
              FBI EMERGENCY AND CRITICAL TRAINING PROGRAMS.

    (a) In General.--There are hereby appropriated for fiscal year 
2014, for any period during which a joint resolution or other Act 
making appropriations for commerce, justice, science, and related 
agencies is not in effect, such sums as may be necessary to continue 
emergency training and critical training by the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, at a rate for operations as provided for such purpose by 
Public Law 113-6 (as reduced by the Presidential sequestration order 
dated March 1, 2013).
    (b) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Emergency training.--The term ``emergency training'' 
        means training of new employees in positions that have been 
        designated as ``emergency''.
            (2) Critical training.--The term ``critical training'' 
        means training of State and local officers, training for 
        international law enforcement officers occurring in the United 
        States, and training of international law enforcement officers 
        abroad (such as the training of officers who will be working in 
        a combat zone) that is deemed necessary in order to protect 
        human life or property.

SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF EXPENDITURES AT END OF AUTOMATIC CONTINUING 
              RESOLUTION PERIOD.

    Expenditures made available pursuant to this Act shall be charged 
to the applicable appropriation whenever a regular or continuing 
appropriations Act described in section 1 is enacted into law.
                                 <all>
```
## SERVED JULY6, 2012 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC INTHE MATTEROF LIBERTY FOUNDATION, INC. FAADOCKETNO. [TO BEASSIGNED] (Civil PenaltyAction) FDMS NO. FAA-2012-0477 

### NOTICE OFASSIGNMENT OFPROCEEDING 

## ...q

Thisproceeding (heretoforedesignated as CaseNo. 201IGL030070)has been assigned to Administrative LawJudge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and othercommunications regarding this proceeding shall be seryed onthe Judge, the FAAHearing bocket, andthe other



## .. Attachment - Service List Cj: 

## 3 3SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 000 1 ONE COPY Stuart A. Goldstein, Respondent's Counsel Stuart A. Goldstein, P .A.

9350 South Dixie Highway, 1oth Floor Miami, FL 33156 TEL: 305-670-1222 FAX: 305-670-7065 Adrianne Wojcik, Complainant's Counsel Office of the Regional Counsel Great Lakes Region, AGL-7 Federal Aviation Administration 2300 East Devon Avenue

Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696 TEL: 847-294-7109 FAX: 847-294-7498

The Honorable J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge Office of Hearings, M-20 ,, U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2132 FAX: 202-366-7536

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0477 (Civil Penalty Action) '• 1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. -2-
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 210 (Monday, October 30, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 64624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27745]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00-2300; MM Docket No. 97-26, RM-8968, RM-9089, RM-9090; MM Docket 
No. 97-91, RM-8854, RM-9221]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Detroit, Howe, Jacksboro, 
Lewisville, Gainesville, Robinson, Corsicana, Mineral Wells TX, 
Antlers, Hugo, OK

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document dismisses an Application for Review filed by 
Jerry Snyder and Associates, an Application for Review filed by Metro 
Broadcasters-Texas, Inc., and a Petition for Partial Reconsideration 
filed by Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation. This document also grants a 
Request for Immediate Issuance of Erratum filed by Great Plains 
Radiocasting to the extent of removing Channel 294C2 at Detroit, Texas. 
All of these pleadings were directed to the Report and Order in this 
proceeding. 63 FR 45182, August 25, 1997.

DATES: Effective November 28, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Hayne, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2177.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Memorandum Opinion and Order adopted September 27, 2000, and released 
October 6, 2000. The full text of this decision is available for 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC 
Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3805, 1231 M Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.
    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments, under Texas, is 
amended by removing Channel 294C2, Detroit.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-27745 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
#### Jesus S. ORTIZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27134.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 3, 1954.

E. A. Blair, Lubbock, for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*730MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is the transportation of beer in ,a dry area; the punishment, a fine of $300.

Inspector Smith of the Liquor Control Board testified that he and Supervisor Black were patrolling a certain area in the City of Lubbock on the morning in question when they observed the appellant pass, going in the opposite • direction and that he immediately turned his automobile ^ around and gave chase. Smith stated that the appellant pulled in between some apartments, juriiped out of his- automobile, and entered one of them; that- he pulled up behind the appellant’s automobile -and, as .he walked past, he could see some beer therein;- that he and Black went to the door and arrested the appellant. Smith testified that he brought the appellant and the three cases of beer found in his automobile to town.

Supervisor Black corroborated the testimony of Smith and added that the appellant and his automobile were never out of his sight from the time they first gave chase until he saw the appellant run into the house and -observed the beer in his automobile.

Appellant did not testify in his own behalf but offered Willie Relerford and his wife, who both testified that the appellant had been at their house approximately fifteen minutes when the officers, arrived.

Appellant seeks a reversal upon the failure of the court to charge on circumstantial evidence. He relies upon two authorities. In Inness v. State, 105 Tex.Cr.R. 401, 288 S.W. 1084, the officer first saw the accused on the street and then next saw him upstairs standing by a table on which he found two bottles of Jamaica ginger and four on the person of the accused. There we held that the evidence was only circumstantial that the accused had transported the ginger found on his person.

In Heath v. State, 121 Tex.Cr.R. 185, 50 S.W.2d 1101, the facts are somewhat similar to those before us here except that in that case there was affirmative testimony that whiskey had been carried out of the house and placed in Wright’s truck, which was adjacent to appellant’s automobile, to- . gether with proof that Gurley was serving a term in the penitentiary- for- having sold whiskey on the occasion charged in the indictment against the appellant. These facts, we think, distinguish that case from the case at bar.

We conclude that the facts before us do not call for a charge on circumstantial evidence.

' Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 3, 2009 

d0527 

Order 

 

June 3, 2009 

137907 

MARGARET GAINFORTH, Personal 

Representative of the ESTATE OF 

FELICE VERMEERSCH, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137907 

 COA: 284972 

Bay CC: 02-003940-NH 

BAY HEALTH CARE, d/b/a BAY DIAGNOSTIC 

CENTER FOR WOMEN, BAY REGIONAL 

MEDICAL CENTER, f/k/a BAY HEALTH 

SYSTEMS and BAY MEDICAL CENTER, INC., 

BAY RADIOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, P.C., 

T. K. JONES, M.D., HARPAL SINGH, M.D., 

and HARPAL SINGH, M.D., P.C.. 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 23, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals, which shall 

hold this case in abeyance pending its decision in Farley v Carp (Court of Appeals 

Docket Nos. 283405, 283418, and 284681). After Farley is decided, the Court of 

Appeals shall reconsider this case in light of that case.
Exhibit 12

RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

Our consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed charges for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Successor period
from July 25, 2007 to December 31, 2007, the Predecessor period from January 1, 2007 to July 24, 2007 and the year ended December 31, 2006 are as follows:

Successor(a)

Predecessor(a)Years Ended Dec. 31,Jul. 25, 2007 to
Dec. 31, 2007

Jan. 1, 2007 to
Jul. 24, 2007

Year Ended
Dec. 31,
2006(in thousands)

2010

2009

2008Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges


(b)


1.03


(c)


(d)


4.92


5.05


(a)Although
ServiceMaster continued as the same legal entity after the Merger, the accompanying ratio calculation is presented for two periods: Predecessor and
Successor, which relate to the period preceding the Merger and the period succeeding the Merger, respectively.(b)For
purposes of the ratio calculation, the deficiency in our earnings to achieve a one-to-one ratio of earnings to fixed charges for
the year ended December 31, 2010 was $20.5 million. For purposes of calculating our ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the year ended December 31, 2010, fixed charges were
$287.0 million.(c)For
purposes of the ratio calculation, the deficiency in our earnings to achieve a one-to-one ratio of earnings to fixed charges for
the year ended December 31, 2008 was $160.2 million. For purposes of calculating our ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the year ended December 31, 2008, fixed charges were
$347.2 million.(d)For
purposes of the ratio calculation, the deficiency in our earnings to achieve a one-to-one ratio of earnings to fixed charges for
the Successor period from July 25, 2007 to December 31, 2007 was $148.5 million. For purposes of calculating our ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the period from
July 25, 2007 to December 31, 2007, fixed charges were $177.9 million.


---



QuickLinks
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

The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as Chief Financial Officer of American Bank Note Holographics, Inc. (the Company), that the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Report and the results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Report.



By:

/S/    MARK J.
BONNEYMark J. Bonney Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting
Officer


Date:  March 30, 2007

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to American Bank Note Holographics, Inc. and will be retained by American Bank Note Holographics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### CHAPMAN v. HUNT et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Sept. 25, 1951.

Abner May, Pikeville, for appellant.

L. C. Farley, Pikeville, for appellees.

WADDILL, Commissioner.

This appeal is from a judgment awarding appellees $600, representing the . balance due upon a written agreement between the parties for the sale of a truck mine.

There has been no bill of exceptions, nor a transcript of the evidence filed in the case. Appellant.has filed what is designated as a bystanders bill of exceptions, which relates .that the official stenographer was unable to prepare the transcript of evidence and the bill of exceptions. None of the evidence is set out in narrative form.

Under the circutnstánces, the only question before the Court is whether the pleadings support the verdict and judgment. Martin v. Richardson, 94 Ky. 183, 21 S. W. 1039, 19 L.R.A. 692; Nuckolls v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 227 Ky. 836, 14 S.W.2d 157; Harp v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 261 Ky. 295, 87 S.W.2d 595.

We have examined the pleadings and find them sufficient to support the judgment.

Judgment -affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the consolidated financial statements and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1

       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                        135,606
<SECURITIES>                  275,000
<RECEIVABLES>                 2,707,735
<ALLOWANCES>                  1,305,000
<INVENTORY>                   163,257
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              2,453,252
<PP&E>                        832,950
<DEPRECIATION>                151,691
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                3,799,548
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         1,978,804
<BONDS>                       515,508
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      671,414
<OTHER-SE>                    1,243,822
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  3,799,548
<SALES>                       4,229,219
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              4,229,219
<CGS>                         447,749
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 447,749
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            49,354
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (715,066)
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (715,066)
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  (715,066)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                 (.13)
        


</TABLE>